Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03645-06
Original file (03645-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                                             DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
 BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 JRE
 Docket No. 03645-06
14 May 2007
                  
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 10 May 2007. 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 found that you served on active duty in the Navy from 17 September 1985 to 14 July 1986, when you were discharged because of a benign bone tumor in your right femur that existed prior to your enlistment. On 4 August 1986, the Veterans Administration denied your request for service connection for the benign tumor, after determining that the condition was not incurred in or aggravated by your naval service.
The Board noted that although the bone tumor was not diagnosed until after you were on active duty, accepted medical principles establish that the tumor existed before you enlisted in the Navy. Accordingly, and as you have not demonstrated that. the condition was aggravated by your naval service, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective -action in your case, 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 | CY2006 | 11019-06

    Original file (11019-06.rtf) 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.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 were discharged from the Navy by reason of physical disability on 6...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01495-08

    Original file (01495-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 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 | CY2002 | 02904-02

    Original file (02904-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive un 3 October 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 error or injustice.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9310741

    Original file (9310741.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    : The applicant's military personnel and medical records show:While a cadet at West Point Military Academy, the applicant was conservatively treated for complaints of increasing low back pain. The applicant was commissioned as a second lieutenant and entered on active duty on 25 May 1988. He also cited examples of his level of physical fitness before and after his surgery while he was a cadet at West Point Military Academy, and how he injured his back when he was the officer in charge of a...

  • 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 | CY2006 | 06054-06

    Original file (06054-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 January 2007. 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075698C070403

    Original file (2002075698C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. He was released from active duty on 6 June 2002 upon completing his required active service. Although the applicant’s service medical and personnel records are not available, it appears he continued to perform his military duties up until the time he departed on transition leave on 7 May 2002.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06513-06

    Original file (06513-06.rtf) 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.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 in order for a service member to be retired by reason of physical disability,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05402-07

    Original file (05402-07.rtf) 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.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 enlisted in the Marine Corps on 13 August 1985. On 3 December 1985, a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07396-01

    Original file (07396-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application OR 22 August 2002. You also received multiple ratings of 0% and one of 10 % for The Board was not persuaded that your mood disorder was ratable above 30% disabling at the time of your permanent retirement. 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...