Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 00910-04
Original file (00910-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

                                   
JRE
Docket No. 00910-04
13 August 2004


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 July 2004. 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 matrial submitted in support thereof, . your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the 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 accept your contention to the effect that you suffered from an ear infection while serving on active duty in the Marine Corps, and that the infection caused a perforation of your eardrum that was present when you were released from active duty on 26 February 1956. In this regard, the Board noted that you were found to have normal hearing on 14 February 1956, when you underwent a pre-separation physical examination, and that your ears, to include the interior and exterior ear canals, and eardrums, were assessed as normal. 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 | CY1999 | 01452-98

    Original file (01452-98.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 February 2000. 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 | CY2009 | 08086-09

    Original file (08086-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    - R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2010. The statements of your former commanding officer and a former member of your platoon were carefully considered, but found insufficient to establish that you were knocked unconscious and sustained damage to your ears and hearing as @ result of a mortar blast, as neither was an eyewitness to your alleged wounding. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • 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 | CY2002 | 08377-02

    Original file (08377-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 December 2002. Documentary material considered by the Board in support thereof, 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. You were given a diagnosis of chronic right middle ear disease, which existed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 01849-05

    Original file (01849-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 2005. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05421-09

    Original file (05421-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A’three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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 | CY2007 | 04871-07

    Original file (04871-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JREDocket No. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09061-08

    Original file (09061-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 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 | CY2003 | 05954-03

    Original file (05954-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Osgood- In this regard, The Board noted that your receipt of a disability benefits from the VA does not demonstrate that your discharge from the Marine Corps was erroneous. As you have not demonstrated that any of the conditions rated by the VA, either separately or in combination with others, rendered you unfit for duty at the time of your discharge from the Marine Corps, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01854

    Original file (BC-2003-01854.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01854 INDEX CODE: 108.02 COUNSEL: DAV HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His injury be changed from Existing Prior To Service (EPTS) to In Line of Duty (ILOD). The reports and disposition letter clearly shows the condition was ILOD. Under the laws in effect at the time, the services did not assign...