Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00528 12
Original file (00528 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

JRE
Docket No. 528-12
19 October 2012

 

 

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 October 2012. 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.

r

when you were discharged by reason of erroneous enlistment due
to diabetes mellitus, a disqualifying medical condition that
existed prior to your enlistment (EPTE). It appears that the
EPTE determination was based on the fact that you were found
to have elevated blood sugar and hemoglobin Hic levels shortly
after you enlisted, which indicates that your blood sugar level
had been elevated prior to your enlistment.

In the absence of evidence which demonstrates Syour @ondl tion
was incurred in or aggravated by your brief period of naval

service, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action
in your case. 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. Inthis 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,

SD | rw~oD_~

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07569-06

    Original file (07569-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.The Board found that you were discharged from the Navy on 15 November 1993, in accordance with your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07800-00

    Original file (07800-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your application on 14 June 2001. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty because of diabetes mellitus on 21 September 1991, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. 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 | CY2000 | 03853-00

    Original file (03853-00.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 May 2001. 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02207

    Original file (PD-2013-02207.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVeterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The Board gives consideration to VA evidence,particularly within 12 months of separation, but only to the extent that it reasonably reflects the severity of the disability at the time of separation. RATING COMPARISON :...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09891-07

    Original file (09891-07.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. Your receipt of substantial disability ratings from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because the VA awarded those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty on the date of your discharge from the Navy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12170-08

    Original file (12170-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2009. You were discharged from the Marine Corps on 10 May 1978. 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 | CY2001 | 01332-01

    Original file (01332-01.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 June 2000. You denied a history of psychiatric symptoms or treatment on the front side of the form, and disclosed a history of counseling for “normal teenage rebellion” on the reverse side. 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 | CY1999 | 02469-99

    Original file (02469-99.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 August 1999. The record reflects that on 30 June 1998 you were referred to a mental health unit because of suicidal ideation, inability to tolerate authority, and a prior undisclosed history of psychiatric treatment. Separation by erroneous entry is authorized when an enlistment would not have occurred if a disqualifying factor had been known prior to enlistment.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02244

    Original file (PD-2013-02244.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    IAW DoDI 6040.44, the Board’s authority is limited to making recommendations on correcting disability determinations. RATING COMPARISON : Service IPEB – Dated 20091009VA* - Based on Service Treatment Records (STR)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Diabetes Mellitus, Type I791320%Diabetes Mellitus, Type I791320%**STROther x 1 (Not in Scope)Other x 0STR Combined: 20%Combined: 20% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20100226 (most proximate to date of separation (DOS)). The...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02046-01

    Original file (02046-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 September 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board did not consider your request for further consideration of your previous request for correction of your record to show that you were retired under the Temporary Early Retirement Authority, or that you were...