DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 06003-10
18 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 7 April
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 gerved on active duty in the Navy from 27 June 1986 to 24 June
1996, when you were discharged in pay grade E-5 at the expiration
of your enlistment. You completed 9 years, 11 months and 28 days
of active duty service. Although you suffered from a number of
medical conditions during your enlistment, you were not considered
unfit for duty at the time of your separation. Following your
discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you
disability ratings for several conditions; unfortunately, the bases
and effective dates of those ratings are not shown in the available
records.
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
for military duty as of 24 June 1996. In the absence of evidence which
demonstrates that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties
of your rank by reason of physical disability, or which establishes
that you were improperly denied the opportunity to reenlist, the
Board was unable to recommend favorable action on your request.
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,
b> Nom Sete.
W. DEAN PFEIRFE
Executive Ditéct
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08685-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2011. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you are entitled to combined disability rating of 30% or higher for the ear canal tumor and hearing loss, or that you suffered from any other conditions that rendered your unfit for duty at the time of your discharge, the Board was unable to recommend favorable action on your request. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05838-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2006. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) denied your request for service connection for a back condition on 26 November 1996 and 18 February 2000, and for depression anda back condition on 23 October 2001. 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 | 11220-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2011. The fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you separate ratings of 10% for asthma from 13 February 1992, headaches from 12 April 1996, and allergic rhinitis from 7 October 1996, as well as 70% for posttraumatic stress disorder from 30 August 2004, is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy record because...
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 | CY2001 | 05506-00
In addition, the VA rates all conditions it classifies as “service connected", without regard to the issue of fitness for military service, and ratings may be raised or lowered throughout a veteran’s life time as the degree of severity of the rated conditions changes. The VA awarded you a 50% rating, while classifying your condition as "mild". 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 | 04539-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 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 | 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 | 08454-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2011. 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 for duty at the time of your transfer to the Fleet Reserve. Consequently, when applying for a correction of: an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04094-10
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 | 07459-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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...