Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05305-10
Original file (05305-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX Docket No. 05305-10
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 11 April 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 31 March
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.

You were evaluated by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) on 5
December 2007 and found unfit for duty because of residuals of a
shoulder injury rated at 20% disabling. You accepted the findings
of the PEB on 16 March 2008, and waived your right to a formal hearing.
You were honorably discharged with entitlement to disability
severance pay on 8 May 2008 in accordance with the approved findings
of the PEB. Effective 9 May 2008 the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) awarded you disability ratings of 20% for the shoulder
condition, 30% for an adjustment disorder, separate ratings of 10%
for conditions of your lumbar spine, right elbow and each knee, 20%
For tinnitus, and 0% for a healed nasal fracture, hypertension and
onychomycosis. Your combined rating was 70% .

 

Your receipt of VA ratings for multiple conditions not rated by the
PEB was not considered 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 for military duty
vis-a-vis each of those conditions. As there is no indication in the
available records that any of the additional conditions rated by the
VA rendered you unfit for duty on 8 May 2008, the Board was unable
to recommend favorable action on your request.
4
, In view of the foregoing, 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,

ly
W. DEAN Sve
Executive Di -

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03478-07

    Original file (03478-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2008 | 01495-08

    Original file (01495-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2010 | 06501-10

    Original file (06501-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 2011. Effective 23 March 1994, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you disability ratings of 20% for the spinal disc eondition, 10% fer CTS of each wrist, 50% for a total hysterectomy with removal of ovaries and fallopian tubes, and 0% for two other conditions. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09908-07

    Original file (09908-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 August 2008. It appears that you were not permitted to reenlist at that time because you were unable to pass the Marine Corps physical fitness test (PFT) because of your shoulder condition. 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 | CY2009 | 02421-09

    Original file (02421-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2009 | 11951-09

    Original file (11951-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on.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 | CY2009 | 13238-09

    Original file (13238-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. In the absence of credible evidence which establishes that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your rank by reason of physical disability due to any of the additional conditions rated by the VA, the Board was unable to recommend corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12128 11

    Original file (12128 11.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 October 2012. 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 offical naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00466-11

    Original file (00466-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, ‘sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2011. Its assignment in your case does not imply that you were released from jactive duty for medical reasons or that you were separated or retired ‘by reason of physical disability. 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 | 04772-10

    Original file (04772-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 2011. The Board did not accept your unsubstantiated contention to the effect that you should have received a disability rating of 30% or higher for syncope, or that you were otherwise entitled to retirement by reason of physical disability, vice separation with entitlement to severance pay. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...