DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY *
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 13115-09
1 October 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 23
September 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 connection, the Board substantially concurred with the the
enclosed rationale of the hearing panel of the Physical Evaluation
Board that considered your case on 11 August 2005. In addition, the
Board concluded that your receipt of disability ratings from the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for conditions other than those
rated by the PEB is not probative of the existence of error or
injustice in your naval record. The Board noted that although the
VA rates all conditions that were incurred in or aggravated by a
veteran’s service, the military departments rate only those
conditions that render a service member unfit for duty or contribute
to an unfitting condition. It was not persuaded that the PEB should
have awarded you disability ratings for any additional conditions.
In view of the foregoing, 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
sapplying 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 Wana
W. DEAN PF
Executive reetor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05882-09
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 | 04541-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 January 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 | CY2009 | 11951-09
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 | 04787-10
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 | 08005-09
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 | 13238-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. In the absence of credible evidence which establishes that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your rank by reason of physical disability due to any of the additional conditions rated by the VA, the Board was unable to recommend corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00171-09
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 | CY2009 | 00295-09
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 | 06432-09
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 | CY2001 | 05506-00
In addition, the VA rates all conditions it classifies as “service connected", without regard to the issue of fitness for military service, and ratings may be raised or lowered throughout a veteran’s life time as the degree of severity of the rated conditions changes. The VA awarded you a 50% rating, while classifying your condition as "mild". Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...