DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS, .,
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No. 02509-10
23 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. You requested that your record be corrected to
show, in effect, that the period of your service on the Temporary
Disability Retired List (TDRL) was active duty service, in order to
increase the amount of your entitlement to combat-related special
compensation.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2
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.
You were released from active duty and transferred to the TDRL on
31 March 1967, having completed 3 years, 5 months and 21 days of active
service. You were permanently retired effective 1 August 1971. As
you did not serve on active duty at any time between 31 July 1967
and 3~ July 1971, there is no basis for correcting your record to
show that you are entitled to additional active duty service credit.
In addition, the Board noted that periods spent on the TDRL are not
creditable as active duty service. 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
fapplying for a correttion of an official naval record, the burden
tis on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
Sincerely,
. ee
W. DEAN P
Executive Dis
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00745-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2009. The Board found that your final disability rating was based on an assessment of the level of impairment caused by your disabilities, rather than on the number of years of creditable service you completed. 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 | 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 | CY2003 | 06901-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were permanently retired by reason of physical with a disability rating The Board was not persuaded that you should have been permanently retired on 30 December 1967, TDRL. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06738-09
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 your disability should have been rated at 30% or higher on 31 October 1977, which would have qualified you for continuation on the TDRL or permanent retirement, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06618-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2010. On 21 March 1973 you were notified by the Commandant of the Marine Corps that as your disability was considered permanent and ratable at less than thirty percent, you would be discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay effective 31 March 1973. Consequentiy, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07193-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 April 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 | CY2001 | 07390-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2001. However, at the end of your anniversary year, on 10 October 1968, you were only credited with 37 retirement points. Therefore, at the end of the 10 October 1970 anniversary year you were only credited with 19 retirement points.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08619-02
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Documentary material considered by the Board 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, it is Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12476-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 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 | 08534-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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...