Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1148 13
Original file (NR1148 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7015S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

JRE

Docket No. 1148-13
13 December 201

iw

 

 

This is inreference 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 5 December 2013. 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 27 February 1998. Although you

disclosed the history of counseling you had undergone in 1992,
you did not report the counseling you had undergone at age 12
related to physical abuse by your father. You were discharged

on 8 May 2000 for the convenience of the government due to a
personality disorder.
The fact that you have been diagnosed with posttraumatic stress
disorder related to an unspecified, but reportedly
combat-related, stressor does not demonstrate that you were
unfit for service by reason of physical disability in 2000 due
to the effects of such a condition. Absent evidence of
unfitness, there is no basis for correcting your record to show
that you were separated or retired by reason of physical
disability. In addition, the evidence you submitted in support
of your application does not demonstrate that the diagnosis
which resulted in your discharge is erroneous.

In view of the foregoing, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the panel members will be furnished upon
request.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. Youare 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. The Board
will not reconsider your request unless you submit complete
records of the counseling you underwent in 1989/90, 1992 and
2000-2013

Sincerely,

bo oa

W. DEAN PF
Executive rector

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02290-01

    Original file (02290-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit for duty. 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 | 05991-02

    Original file (05991-02.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2003. After reviewing the report of that examination on 14 April 2000, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of residuals of your cancer, which it rated at 0%. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...

  • 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 | CY2002 | 04334-01

    Original file (04334-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board your 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 Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of post traumatic stress disorder and major depression, which existed prior to your enlistment, and were not aggravated by your service. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13150-09

    Original file (13150-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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 | CY2001 | 00216-01

    Original file (00216-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2001. consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, limited portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board was not persuaded that you suffered from post traumatic stress disorder in 1945 that you were unfit for duty in 1950 because of a disability which was incurred...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01675-01

    Original file (01675-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    that you seek treatment for the post traumatic stress disorder from the Department of Veterans Affairs following your separation. You were discharged from the Navy on 16 April 1992 by reason of CONDITIONS You underwent a pre-separation physical - PERSONALITY DISORDERS ”. “OTHER PHYSICAL/MENTAL In his opinion, He also recommended The fact that you suffered from post traumatic stress disorder during your naval service was not considered probative of the existence of material error or...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06411-02

    Original file (06411-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As you may kn fitness for military duty cases where the service presumption of fitness, disorder were considered insufficient to warrant any corrective ove, you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty, isability separation or retirement of a service member. The Veterans Administration and the Gulf War Health rked up these multiple medical problems without definitely defining was found “fit” for retirement, his case was not referred to the PEB r not he was eligible for medical...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03004-10

    Original file (03004-10.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. 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 | CY2006 | 08506-06

    Original file (08506-06.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 February 2008. 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...