Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08534-09
Original file (08534-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100

 

JRE
Docket No. 08534-09
19 February 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 19 February 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.

You served on active duty from 29 July 1966 to 28 July 1968,
when you were released from active duty and transferred to the
Navy Reserve. Pursuant to the action of the Board dated 15
November 1977, you record was corrected to show that you were
transferred to the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL)
effective 28 July 1968, with a disability rating of 30%, and
that you were discharged with entitlement to disability
severance pay on 1 February 1970, with a disability rating of
10%. Your condition was rated at 10% disabling by the Veterans
Administration from 29 July 1968 to 18 March 1976, when it was
increased to 40%.

In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your
disability was ratable at or above 30% disabling on 1 February
1970, there is no basis for correcting your record to show that
you were retired by reason of physical disability vice
discharged. 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,
W. DEAN PF R
Executive rédtor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04718-99

    Original file (04718-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2001. IN REPLY REFER TO: 1400/3 MMPR-2 13 Mar 01 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS ADVISORY OPINION IN THE CASE OF FORMER - ‘ a retired Marine indicates that he completed his he grade of probationary corporal and should have been promoted to the grade of sergeant prior to his retirement from the Marine Corps on 22...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07390-00

    Original file (07390-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2001. However, at the end of your anniversary year, on 10 October 1968, you were only credited with 37 retirement points. Therefore, at the end of the 10 October 1970 anniversary year you were only credited with 19 retirement points.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12440-08

    Original file (12440-08.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. The Board concluded that your receipt of disability compensation from the VA for a depressive disorder is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because the VA assigned the disability rating more than thirty years after you were retired, and without regard to your condition as of the date of your retirement. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00171-09

    Original file (00171-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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 | 03314-10

    Original file (03314-10.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. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty on 5 June 1969, or that your release from active duty on that date was improper, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07193-10

    Original file (07193-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 April 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 | CY2010 | 11657 10

    Original file (11657 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 18 August 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 | 03584-09

    Original file (03584-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2010. On 22 November 1968, you received NUP for UA from you appointed place of duty. On 28 May 1970 you were 8O discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01180-07

    Original file (01180-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Specifically, the panel of the Board that considered your case was not persuaded you were issued the silencing order described in your application, that you suffered from posttraumatic stress disorder while serving on active duty in the Navy, or that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability prior to your separation from the Navy. Two other survivors of the Liberty attack have applied for correction of their naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04539-10

    Original file (04539-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 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...