DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
Docket No. 6225-15 

tfAf 2 02811 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 use 1552. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board fou.nd it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limit ations and consider your case on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 2016. Your allegations of error and .injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrat ive regulations and procedures applicab1e to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together wit h all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statµtes, . regulations and policies. 

A review of your record shows that you were found unfit for continued naval service by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) on 8 July 1993 for Stage II Lymphoma with a 100% disability rating. You were continued on the Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL) until 1 
March 2000 when you were removed from the TDRL and discharged. On 2 March 2012, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) diagnosed your 
lymphoma as in remission and reduced your service connected disability rating to 0%. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a disability retirement from the military. You contend that you don't believe an error was committed by the ·military but feel an injustice exists since you were told by a VA counsel or that you would receive ·compensation f or life. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. The Board relies on a presumption of regularity to suppor t the official actions of Navy personnel and, in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary, will presume that they have properly discharged their official duties. In your case, the Board was hampered by the lack of records to determ,_ine whether any error was committed and applied the presumption of regularity of records. 

Regarding your loss of VA compensation, the Board was sympathetic to your case but determined that the VA counselor's statements to you did not warrant granting you a disability retirement from the military since there was no evidence presented that shows you were entitled to one. Accordingly, t he Board was unabl e to find an error or injustice warranting a correction to your record and deni ed your application. Your request for a personal appearance bef~re t he Board has also been denied. The Board lacked documentary evidence from your records but felt your presence would not address their needs. 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 evidence within one yea,r from the date ·of the Board• s decision.· New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. I n 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, 
Executive Director 
2