DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD BLDG 12, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JRE
Docket No. 2220-13
becember i6, Z0i5
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 12 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
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies.
Réter 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 served on active duty in the Navy from 13 to 31 January
1992, when you were discharged by reason of erroneous entry due
to a disqualifying knee condition which existed prior to your
enlistment.
Your receipt of a disability rating from the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) beginning in 2010 was not considered
probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval
record because the VA assigned that rating without regard to the
issue of your fitness for duty in 1992. In the absence of
evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit for duty by
Printed on & Recycled Paper
—,
reason of physical disability that was incurred in or aggravated
by your 18 days of naval service, the Board was unable to
recommend favorable action on your request. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
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,
\GQrem
W. DEAN P R
Fxecutive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11220-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2011. The fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you separate ratings of 10% for asthma from 13 February 1992, headaches from 12 April 1996, and allergic rhinitis from 7 October 1996, as well as 70% for posttraumatic stress disorder from 30 August 2004, is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy record because...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04188-00
The disc condition was rated on a presumptive basis, i.e., it was diagnosed and found to be 10% or more disabling within one year of your discharge from the Navy. The Board noted that the military departments rate only those conditions which render a member unfit to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating at the time of his separation or retirement, whereas the VA rates any condition it classifies as “service connected”. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05877-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2008. The increase in severity of your back condition which occurred during the years following your discharge is a matter under the purview of the VA, rather than the Department of the Navy, as the VA may adjust and add disability ratings throughout a veteran’s lifetime, whereas rating determinations made by the military departments are fixed as of the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02228-07
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. On 18 December 2004, you reenlisted in the Navy Reserve. 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,W.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05308-06
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE Docket No. 05308-06 16 July 2007 Dear
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07375-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2009. 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 | 12280-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2009. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your condition was ratable at or above 30% disabling on the date of your discharge from the Navy, 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 | CY2008 | 08410-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your haval 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 | 01137-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 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 | 01420-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 November 2001. The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 25 October 1988. separation physical examination on 3 June 1992. 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.