DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX JRE
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No. 02530-10
18 January 2011
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 6
January 2011. 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 18 November 2009 and 4 January 2010, the Physical Evaluation Board
(‘PEB) made the preliminary finding that you were fit for duty
notwithstanding a post-surgical condition of your right shoulder
rotator cuff. On 22 January 2010, the President, PEB, acting for
the Secretary of the Navy, formally determined that you were fit for
duty. You were released from active duty on 19 March 2010 by reason
of completion of required service.
The Board concluded that the existence of a condition of your left
shoulder did not provide a basis for the PEB to find you unfit for
duty ON 18 November 1989 or 4 January 2010, when it found you fit
for duty as to the right shoulder condition, because the condition
of your left shoulder had not been referred for consideration by the
PER. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that the PEB
erred when if found you fit for duty, the Board was unable to recommend
that the findings of the PEB be reversed. If you believe you require
medical care for your left shoulder, or that it should be considered
by the PEB, you should pursue those matters through your unit of
assignment and normal medical channels.
In view of the fgregoing, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panei will be furnished upon
request. ze
/
)
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,
LD Qa
W. DEAN PFEIBF
Executive Di¥ector
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01495-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 2009. 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 | 02421-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2010. Your receipt of VA disability ratings for multiple conditions is not probative of the existence of material error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for Military duty at the time of your release from active duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03478-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 May 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in Support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, The Board found that on 28 January 2005, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty by reason of bilateral knee conditions, each of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04458-10
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 | CY2010 | 05305-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 04422-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2011. You were discharged in accordance with the approved findings of the PEB on 31 March 2007. 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 | 04280-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1” 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 | 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120017861
The PEB recommended a 40% combined disability rating and permanent disability retirement. Whatever the mental health diagnosis would be, the 2010 MEB findings would have held that the diagnosis would have met medical retention standards based on the applicant's 2010 complaints and work history. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected: a. amending item 3 of the applicant's DA Form 3947, dated 5 October 2010, to...