Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04832-09
Original file (04832-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
, 2 NAVY ANNEX
JRE

WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100
Docket No. 04832-09
9 March 2010

 

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the
United States Code, section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 4 March 2010. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
ingufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. In this regard, the Board found that all
veterans who require the use of a continuous positive airway
pressure (CPAP} device to treat obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) at
the time of separation are entitled to a Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) disability rating of 50%. That rating is assigned
without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty. As
you were found fit for duty following a period of limited duty
with a diagnosis of OSA, and you have not demonstrated that you
had become unfit for duty as of 14 May 2009, there is no basis
for granting your request for disability separation or
retirement. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request. ,
The Board requested that you be advised that you have the right
to request correction of your record to show that you were
retained on active duty rather than separated by reason of a
condition not a disability on 14 May 2009.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04587-09

    Original file (04587-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04280-10

    Original file (04280-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1” February 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00751-09

    Original file (00751-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2010. Your receipt of disability rating from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because the VA awarded those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty as of the date of your release from active duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00290-10

    Original file (00290-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were not physically qualified for release from active duty on 2 October 2008, or that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability on 27 May 2009, when you were discharged by reason of physical fitness assessment failure, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04787-10

    Original file (04787-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. As there is no indication in the available records that you were unfit for duty on 30 July 2009 due to the effects of any of the additional conditions rated by the VA, the Board was tunable to recommend favorable action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00955

    Original file (PD2011-00955.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    We feel that this warrants a review for a consideration to The Permanent Disabled Retired List.” He elaborates no specific contentions regarding rating or coding and mentions no additionally contended conditions. The Board however noted a neurology clinic record dated 21 May 2007 that indicated the CI was not using CPAP, that prescribed medication completely controlled the cataplexy, and that medication was also controlling his daytime sleepiness. At the time of the 26 March 2010 C&P...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04094-10

    Original file (04094-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The VA rating officials who made that award found no objective evidence in your naval health record that was pertinent to your claim, and they...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08905-09

    Original file (08905-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA for migraine headaches and related depression is not probative of the existence of material error or injustice in your Navy record, because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty on 31 October 2003. As you were found physically qualified for separation from the Navy, and have not demonstrated that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating by reason...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02771-09

    Original file (02771-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2010. Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden -is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08319-10

    Original file (08319-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2011. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating at the time of separation or retirement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...