Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08319-10
Original file (08319-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

JRE
Docket No. 08319-10
3 March 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 3 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. In
this regard, the Board found that you were voluntarily separated from
the Marine Corps on 22 August 1967 without entitlement to disability
separation or retirement because you had recovered from the wounds
you had sustained on 12 August 1966 and were considered fit for duty
and separation at that time.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) must assign a disability
rating to any condition incurred in or aggravated by a period of
military service, without regard to the issue of the veteran’s
fitness for military duty; consequently, the VA was required to rate
the loss of your spleen and a kidney even though neither condition
was more than minimally symptomatic. In addition, the VA is permitted
to add disability ratings at any time, as it did in your case in 2004,
2007 and 2009, when it added ratings for posttraumatic stress
disorder, coronary artery disease, tinnitus, hearing loss, scars,
and compensatory hypertrophy of your remaining kidney. Unlike the
VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability
ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found
unfit to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank
or rating at the time of separation or retirement. Once assigned,
ratings cannot be raised or lowered, and ratings for new or related
conditions cannot be assigned. As you performed your duties ina
-highly creditable manner until you were discharged from the Marine
Corps, there was no basis for referring you for disability evaluation
or finding you unfit for duty.

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,

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2010 | 11657 10

    Original file (11657 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 18 August 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 | CY2005 | 08695-05

    Original file (08695-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    08695-05 6 November 2006This is in reference to your application for correction of your navalrecord 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, consideredyour application on 26 October 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted insupport thereof, yournaval recordandapplicable statutes,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04463-02

    Original file (04463-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2002. 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 | 08685-10

    Original file (08685-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2002 | 01979-02

    Original file (01979-02.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 October 2002. The fact that the VA has awarded you substantial disability rating is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigns ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty, and it may raise, lower, or assign ratings throughout a veteran ’s life time. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04901-10

    Original file (04901-10.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 March 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 naval service as of 28 October 2009. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08797-09

    Original file (08797-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. Your receipt of a combined disability rating of 10% from the VA shortly after you were released from active duty is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because those ratings were assigned without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty on 25 June 1985. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • 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 | CY2010 | 07459-10

    Original file (07459-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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