Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00664 12
Original file (00664 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. 664-12
1 November 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 25 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. In this regard the Board concurred with the
findings of the Physical Evaluation Board of 9 August 2010 and
the Judge Advocate General of 27 December 2011, that you have
not established that your knee replacement surgery was the
result of an injury or illness incurred as a direct result of
armed conflict, while engaged in extra-hazardous service, under
conditions simulating war, or caused by an instrumentality of
war. The Board could not identify a specific combat-related

event that caused the degeneration of your right knee joint.
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,

() / OBERT D. oa

Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 03279-04

    Original file (03279-04.doc) 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 2005. 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. 2 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05782-02

    Original file (05782-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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 | CY2004 | 10079-04

    Original file (10079-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    10079-043 March 2006This 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 2 March 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04963-10

    Original file (04963-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 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 | 11455-10

    Original file (11455-10.pdf) 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03885-10

    Original file (03885-10.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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02964-03

    Original file (02964-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction >f Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 May 2 0 0 3 . After careful and conscientious consideration or m e entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of prob~hle material error or injustice. You were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-3T, to indicatz that you did not meet applicable weight standards at that time.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05069-02

    Original file (05069-02.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    As you have not demonstrated that your sleep apnea condition was ratable above 10%, or that any of your other conditions rendered you unfit for duty, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action. THE HEARING WAS RECONVENED ON 3 SEPTEMBER 1996 WITH COUNSEL FOR THE MEMBER BUT WITHOUT THE MEMBER BEING PRESENT, AT WHICH TIME ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WAS SUBMITTED, INCLUDING THE NEUROPSYCHOLOGIC EVALUATION REPORT AND A SHOWERS EVIDENCE LETTER FROM THE MEMBER’S FORMER COMMANDING OFFICER. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11594-08

    Original file (11594-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2002 | 04284-00

    Original file (04284-00.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 February 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. You were discharged on 28 November 1969 due to your failure to meet the minimum physical standards for enlistment due to a condition which existed...