Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03236-01
Original file (03236-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

JRE
Docket No: 3236-01
12 February 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 7 February 2002. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board.
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your
naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

Documentary material considered by the Board

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 found that you appeared before a medical board on 28 June 1966, and were given
diagnoses of chronic mastoiditis, left ear, post mastoidectomy, and severe hearing loss in the
left ear. The medical board determined that notwithstanding those conditions, you were fit
for duty, and recommended that you be returned to full duty.
findings and recommendation on 28 June 1966, and declined to submit a statement in
rebuttal. You were released from active duty on 5 August 1966, and transferred to the Fleet
Reserve at your request.

You were advised of those

The Board noted that although you incurred a severe hearing loss in your left ear during your
naval service, you had good hearing in your right. There is no indication in the available
records that your partial hearing loss rendered you unfit to perform the duties of your office,
grade, rank or rating at the time of your release from active duty. The fact that the
Department of Veterans Affairs awarded you disability compensation is not probative of the
existence of error or injustice in your record, because that agency awards such benefits for
all conditions it classifies as  “service connected”, not matter how slight, and without regard

to the issue   of fitness for military duty. 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. 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 | 04463-02

    Original file (04463-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 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 | CY2010 | 08685-10

    Original file (08685-10.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. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you are entitled to combined disability rating of 30% or higher for the ear canal tumor and hearing loss, or that you suffered from any other conditions that rendered your unfit for duty at the time of your discharge, the Board was unable to recommend favorable action on your request. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03604-02

    Original file (03604-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 November 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04787-10

    Original file (04787-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. As there is no indication in the available records that you were unfit for duty on 30 July 2009 due to the effects of any of the additional conditions rated by the VA, the Board was tunable to recommend favorable action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00130-01

    Original file (00130-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. "I want out of the military service because On 16 July 1968 you received On 14 June You On 28 March 1969, the Naval Discharge Review Board considered your case and concluded that the original...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06105-05

    Original file (06105-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 August 2004, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) considered the medical board report and other records, and determined that you were fit for duty. You were discharged from the Navy under honorable conditions on 29 October 2004, by reason of a personality disorder. 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,

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08695-05

    Original file (08695-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    08695-05 6 November 2006This is in reference to your application for correction of your navalrecord 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, consideredyour application on 26 October 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted insupport thereof, yournaval recordandapplicable statutes,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08319-10

    Original file (08319-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2011. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating at the time of separation or retirement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08797-09

    Original file (08797-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. Your receipt of a combined disability rating of 10% from the VA shortly after you were released from active duty is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because those ratings were assigned without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty on 25 June 1985. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07874-08

    Original file (07874-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2009. As you have not demonstrated that your hip/groin condition was unfitting on 31 March 2002 and ratable at 20% or higher, and/or that you back condition was ratable at 30% or more at that time, there is no basis for corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...