Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06414-01
Original file (06414-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT  OF THE  NAVY 

B O A R D   F O R   C O R R E C T I O N   O F   N A V A L   R E C O R D S  

2  N A V Y A N N E X  

W A S H I N G T O N   D C   2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0  

JRE 
Docket No:  6414-01 
6 March  2002 

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  28  February 2002.  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. 

The Board  was  unable to conclude that you  suffered from oral cancer during your naval 
service, which terminated in  1966, or that you  were unfit by  reason of  physical disability at 
that  time.  In  this regard, it noted that you  apparently confused the fibrous dysplasia of  your 
mandible, which was identified  on  18 February  1963, as a cancerous growth.  Available 
records do not indicate that there were any residuals to the dysplasia or that you  later 
developed oral cancer.  In  addition, it noted  that you  were found physically qualified for 
release from active duty on 24 February  1966.  The physician who conducted the 
examination did  not  note any disqualifying defects or conditions, and  you  did  not report any 
at that time. 

In  view of  the foregoing, 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  submissidn 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, 

W.  DEAN PFEIFFER 
Executive Director 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03217-02

    Original file (03217-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-~nember panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 May 2002. The medical board report indicates that you had undc:.guw an osteotomy in 1979 to cc)rr'Cd dysplasia of your left hip, and that you had been active in sports and had little difficulty with your hip since that time. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04169-01

    Original file (04169-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    They also considered your counsel's letters dated 25 June 2001 with enclosures, 25 July 2001 with enclosure, and 23 March 2002. For us to recommend relief, the petitioner has to show that either there is no rational support for the reporting senior's action or that the reporting senior acted for an illegal or improper purpose. In this case, the reporting senior makes it clear in references (b) and (c) and his endorsement to the member's statement his reason for submitting the reports as they did.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05634-01

    Original file (05634-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 February 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 | CY2001 | 04637-01

    Original file (04637-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit for duty at the time of your discharge, 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. 0 2 M A Y 1 9 9 6 DATE MEMBER'S STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING: I UNDERSTAND THAT THE RECOMMENDED F I N D I N G OF F I T FOR DUTY I S S U B J E C T...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03392-01

    Original file (03392-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2002. The members of the chain of command were present, made statements and were available to answer questions . He then told LT HI who then called Ms. D. The Board also considered the statement of the retired chief petty officer who stated that you were not derelict in your duties while you were treating him and that he did not see any disrespect.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05268-01

    Original file (05268-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 February 2002. Your reasons for using drugs, the adverse consequences of your discharge under other than honorable conditions, and your reasons for wanting the characterization of your service to be upgraded were carefully considered, but found insufficient to warrant a recommendation for corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04989-01

    Original file (04989-01.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. The Board was unable to find you were denied access to all documentation on which the contested evaluation was based. 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 | 06213-01

    Original file (06213-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 April 2001. The Board noted that it has no authority to take any action which would affect the finality of your conviction by special court-martial, and that its authority in this case is limited to correcting your record as a matter of clemency. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03198-02

    Original file (03198-02.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 April 2002. 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 applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02520-01

    Original file (02520-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...