Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02402-02
Original file (02402-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

NAVY 

ANNEX

2 

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

S

JRE
Docket No: 2402-02
10 September 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 29 August 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 rejected your unsubstantiated contention to the effect that you did not suffer from
cirrhosis of the liver when you were discharged from the Naval Reserve in 1949, because of
your history of alcoholism, and enlarged liver, spider angiomata, and early alcoholic
cirrhosis. As you have not demonstrated that your discharge was erroneous or unjust, your
application has been denied. 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.
important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.

In this regard, it is

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 | 06439-02

    Original file (06439-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting session, considered your application on 31 October 2002. 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 material error or injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-00280

    Original file (BC-2006-00280.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00280 INDEX CODE: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 1 AUGUST 2007 ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation (hardship) be changed to a medical reason. Although a review of the medical records show the applicant was diagnosed with chronic hepatitis...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03957-08

    Original file (03957-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2009. 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030309

    Original file (20100030309.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, that the records of her deceased father, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to upgrade his discharge to honorable and to show he retired with 23 years of service. The available records contain no evidence of any administrative actions extending the applicant on active duty beyond his established retirement date. The FSM was not (or should not have been) discharged with a UOTHC discharge and should be shown to have retired with 23 years of service.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02686

    Original file (PD-2013-02686.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    RATING COMPARISON : FPEB – 20070720VA Rating Decision 1 - 20051213TDRL Placement – 20050516Code RatingConditionCodeRating Proximate ConditionTDRLPlacementTDRL RemovalTDRL 2 TDRL 2 Removal Hepatitis B7312/734530%0%Cirrhosis of the Liver with Hepatitis B7312100%100%Other x 0 (Not in Scope)Other x 0 RATING: 30% → 0%RATING: 10% 1. The examiner noted the CI was not receiving any current treatment and reported no incapacitation from the condition.The exam was normal, without signs of liver...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00213

    Original file (BC-2004-00213.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    His CRSC application was disapproved on 16 Dec 03 based upon the fact that his service-connected medical conditions were determined not to be combat- related. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04688-11

    Original file (04688-11.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 May 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 | CY2009 | 04436-09

    Original file (04436-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this 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 | CY2009 | 06475-09

    Original file (06475-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 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. On 11 December 2002, you were notified of pending administrative separation action due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by alcohol dependence.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01885-09

    Original file (01885-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 November 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...