DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 02076-10
17 December 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 17
December 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 .
On 22 June 2006, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made a
preliminary finding that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical
disability due to post-phlebitic syndrome that was ratable at 10%
under the Department of Veterans Afffairs (VA) rating schedule. The
PFB made that finding notwithstanding your belief that you were fit
for further service. As you did not respond to the notification of
the preliminary findings of the PEB, your acceptance was presumed,
and you were discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay
in accordance with the approved finding of the PEB.
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were entitled
to a rating of 30% or higher from the Department of the Navy at the
time of your discharge by reason of physical disability, 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
gepplying 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,
Munn
W. DEAN P E
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12362-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2012 | NR7104 12
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03988-08
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 2 oO oe
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 | CY2006 | 07928-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 2007. In addition, it considered an advisory opinion dated 4 May 2007 that was furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps. In this regard, the Board was not persuaded that the notification of the preliminary findings of the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) was mailed to an incorrect address.
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 | CY2001 | 02335-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 2001. 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...