DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JRE
Docket No. 9513-12
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. In this regard, the Board found that the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) assigned you a permanent
rating of 30% for the replacement of a heart valve in 1998 in
accordance with a provision of the VA schedule for rating
disabilities (VASRD) that was no longer in effect when the
Physical Evaluation Board rated your condition in 2000. The
VA continued the rating originally assigned in 1998 because the
cancelled provision of the VASRD was more favorable to you than
the revised provision.
In view of the foregoing, and as you have not demonstrated that
your disability was ratable at or above 30% disabling when you
were discharged, 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,
ROBERT D. ALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 08393 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 2012. As you have not demonstrated that you were entitled to a disability rating of 30% or higher from the Department of the Navy as of 24 February 1993, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12128 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 October 2012. 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 offical naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06507-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 August 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00171-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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 | 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 | CY2002 | 00799-02
A medical board was prepared in January 1998 and PEB's Record Review Panel In June, 1998, the forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for consideration. Lumbar Decompression and Low Back Pain Status Post Fusion (72420) The Record Review Panel found the member unfit for duty under VA Code 5295, rated his condition at 10% disability and separation pay. However, Therefore, after careful consideration of all relevant medical evidence, viewed in a .light most favorable to the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03096-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 2002. February 1999, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of the depressive disorder, which it rated at 10% disabling. 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 | 05933-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 July 2001. As you have not demonstrated that In this regard, it noted that the VA assigns disability ratings to Affairs(VA) disability rating you were unfit for duty at the time of your discharge from the Marine Corps, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07295-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2003. 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 | 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...