Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06512-09
Original file (06512-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51700

 

JRE
Docket No. 6512-09
24 May 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 20 May 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
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

The Board conciuded that your receipt of a disability rating of
30% from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) effective the
day following your discharge from the Navy with entitlement to
disability severance pay is not probative of the existence of
error or injustice in your naval record. in this regard, the
Board found that the VA rating was based in large part on the
increased limitation of motion of your cervical spine that
occurred during the twelve months after you were discharged. In
addition, VA rating officials granted you the 30% rating despite
acknowledging that your condition did not meet the schedular
criteria for a rating in excess of 20%.
As you have not demonstrated that the Physical Evaluation Board
erred in not assigning you a disability rating of 30% or higher,
the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your
case. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names
and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request.

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 | 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05882-09

    Original file (05882-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. As you have not demonstrated that any of the additional conditions rated by the VA rendered you unfit to reasonably perform your Military duties, and that you were entitled to a combined rating from the Department of the Navy of 30% or higher, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05589-09

    Original file (05589-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted o£ your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty on 1 July 1995 because of the back condition and/or the diabetes mellitus, and that you should have received a combined disability rating from the Department of the Navy of 30% or higher, the Board was unable to recommend corrective...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06476-09

    Original file (06476-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 September 2010. The fact that the VA assigned a disability rating that is higher than the rating assigned by the Department of the Navy is insufficient to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, especially since the basis for the VA rating is unclear In the absence of evidence which establishes that you were entitled to a rating of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04090-09

    Original file (04090-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2010. In this regard, the Board noted that the VA assigned ratings to the lumbosacral strain and radiculopathy without regard to the issue of your fitness to reasonably perform military duty prior to your discharge, and that the rating you received for a mood disorder was based on your condition more than eighteen months after you were discharged from...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06432-09

    Original file (06432-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2010. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. 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 | 08005-09

    Original file (08005-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 2010. On 2 June 1999, a formal hearing panel of the PEB considered your case and assigned you a combined disability rating of 10% for conditions of your lumbar and cervical spine. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11951-09

    Original file (11951-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on.14 January 2010. The Board concluded that your receipt of a VA disability rating for migraine headaches is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy record. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04586-10

    Original file (04586-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 assigns disability ratings without regard to the issue of the veteran’s fitness for military duty, whereas the military departments rate only those conditions that render a service member unfit for duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05392-10

    Original file (05392-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2011. Your receipt of disability compensation from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record. 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.