Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09216-09
Original file (09216-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE

Docket No. 09216-09
8 April 2010

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of che
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 8 April 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. In this regard, the Board was not persuaded
that you should have received a disability rating for non-
cardiac chest pain in addition to the rating of 30% you received
for cardiomyopathy. The fact that a condition has been
classified as “service connected” by the Department of Veterans
Affairs is insufficient to demonstrate that the condition should
have been rated by the Physical Evaluation Board. Although the
VA must rate all service connected conditions, the military
departments rate only those conditions that rendered the service
member unfit for duty at the time of separation or retirement.
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,

Wy Daan’

W. DEAN PFEI
Executive Dinectdér

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 00295-09

    Original file (00295-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2010. The VA denied your request for service connection for six other conditions. 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 | 02481-09

    Original file (02481-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in 'gupport 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 | 06361-10

    Original file (06361-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 mp 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 | 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 | 00764-10

    Original file (00764-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 December 2010. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability at the time of your discharge, or that the diagnosis of a personality disorder was made in error, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07469-09

    Original file (07469-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your _ application on 1 April 2010. On 28 September 2009, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) denied your request for service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder, after determining that the disorder was not related to your military service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07469-09

    Original file (07469-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your _ application on 1 April 2010. On 28 September 2009, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) denied your request for service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder, after determining that the disorder was not related to your military service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13115-09

    Original file (13115-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 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 sapplying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence 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...