DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 11657-10
19 August 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 18
August 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 enlisted in the Navy on 24 November 1964. On 5 February 1968
a medical board determined that you suffered from asymptomatic
sarcoidosis, and found you fit for duty. You underwent a
pre-separation physical examination on 17 May 1968 and were found
fit for duty and separation. You were released from active duty on
24 May 1968 and transferred to the Navy Reserve. You were examined
on 7 June 1974 and 2 October 1976 and found fit for duty. On 7
September 2010 the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you
a disability rating of 60% for kidney disease thought to be related
to your naval service, and confirmed its previous award of a 0% rating
for sarcoidosis.
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit
to reasonably perform your duties by reason of physical disability
on 24 May 1968, 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,
Lo Dende
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Dsrevetor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03122-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2009. The fact that the VA awarded you a disability rating for your condition more than thirty years after you were discharged is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because that rating reflects the severity of your condition in 2007 rather than in 1976, when it was Largely asymptomatic. Consequently, when applying...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016478
There are no available records of treatment for this condition while on active duty. However, the applicant has not provided and the record does not contain any evidence that the residuals of this wound resulted in a negative impact on his continuation of his duties while on active duty. The VA is not required to determine fitness for duty at the time of separation.
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02007
SEPARATION DATE: 20080804 The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the VASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The rating was based on clinical records that documented in October 2011 the CI reported pain and inflammation, and the VA respiratory examination in June 2012 that documented continued complaints of fatigue and intermittent chest...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05157-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2000. 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. You were wounded in action on 26 December 1968, and awarded the Purple Heart on 5 January 1969.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04969-10
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 | CY2008 | 11594-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. the Board. 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 | CY2008 | 05692-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navai Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2009. As noted above, you accepted the initial findings of the PEB, waived your right to a hearing, and acknowledged that you would be 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 05180-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 June 2011. Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA for conditions not rated by the Department of the Navy 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 vis-a-vis those conditions. Consequently, when applying for a correction...
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...