Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01197-10
Original file (01197-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No. 01197-10
9 November 2010

 

 

oe

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
November 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 in the Marine Corps from 28 July 1999 to
3 December 2002, when you were discharged for the convenience of the
government due to a condition not a disability, namely, a knee
condition related to one that you failed to disclose at the time of
your enlistment. On 27 December 2006, the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) awarded you a 10% rating for a minor knee condition.

Your receipt of VA compensation is not probative of the existence
of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA awarded
that compensation without regard to the issue of your fitness for
military duty. As you have not demonstrated that you were UIE Lor
duty by reason of physical disability that was incurred in or

aggravated by your brief period of naval service, 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
Poiying for a correction ‘of an official naval record, the burden
ee on the applicantito demonstrate the existence of probable material
‘error or injustice.

Sincerely,

 
  
 

W. DEAN P
Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04458-10

    Original file (04458-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 January 2011. As noted above, you were found fit for duty by the PEB, and you accepted that finding, which suggests that you felt that you were fit for duty at that time. 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 | CY2004 | 03279-04

    Original file (03279-04.doc) 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 2005. 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. 2 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • 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 | CY2007 | 09264-07

    Original file (09264-07.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 July 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Your receipt of a 0% disability rating from the VA does not demonstrate that you were erroneously discharged from the Marine Corps by reason of a condition, not a disability. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04196-10

    Original file (04196-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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 | CY2008 | 01227-08

    Original file (01227-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 2008. In addition, the VA rated three conditions at 0%, and determined that fifteen other conditions for which you requested ratings were not incurred in or aggravated by your naval service. The military departments, unlike the VA, are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where a service member has been found unfit to reasonably...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04541-09

    Original file (04541-09.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 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 | CY2010 | 04963-10

    Original file (04963-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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 applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is,on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03604-02

    Original file (03604-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 November 2002. 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | NR7104 12

    Original file (NR7104 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA for conditions not rated by the PEB is not probative of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigns disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military service. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were entitled to a higher disability rating from the PEB for your knee condition or that you suffered from any other conditions that should have been rated by the PEB, the Board was unable to...