Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02131-10
Original file (02131-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX JRE

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No. 02131-10
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. In
this regard, the Board was not persuaded that your disability was
ratable at or above 30% disabling when you were discharged by reason
of physical disability effective 15 October 1991. That the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) raised your disability rating
substantially approximately two years after you were discharged from
the Naval Service was not considered probative of the existence of
error or injustice in your naval record, because the higher VA rating
was based on the increase in severity of your condition that occurred
after you were separated from the Navy. 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,

 

ak

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02076-10

    Original file (02076-10.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. 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. Consequently, when gepplying...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04094-10

    Original file (04094-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. The VA rating officials who made that award found no objective evidence in your naval health record that was pertinent to your claim, and they...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04787-10

    Original file (04787-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 00751-09

    Original file (00751-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2010. Your receipt of disability rating from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because the VA awarded those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty as of the date of your release from active duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06638-09

    Original file (06638-09.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. 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 | 00485-10

    Original file (00485-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 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 | 01189-10

    Original file (01189-10.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. Your receipt of substantial @isability ratings from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00796-10

    Original file (00796-10.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. On 12 December 2007, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) denied your request for service connection for thoracic back strain that was incurred during the aforementioned period of duty. Although you were treated for a minor back strain while on active duty, there is no indication in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09267-09

    Original file (09267-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness to reasonably perform your military duties at the time of your release from active duty. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty at that time, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • 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...