Dear 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, 
United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire 
record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was 
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your 
application has been denied. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of 
justice to waive the statute of limitations 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 22 August 2019. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be 
furnished upon request. 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, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable 
statutes, regulations and policies. 

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy on 25 July 1975. 
Within a few days of reporting for basic training, you were evaluated for a heart murmur and 
diagnosed with rheumatic heart disease with mitral insufficiency. A medical board confirmed 
your diagnosis on 24 September 1975 and determined that your disability condition existed prior 
to your entry into the Navy. You were recommended your administrative separation for failing 
to meet physical standards for enlistment and elected to be discharged for erroneous enlistment. 
However, on 26 September 1975, you were discharged for a preexisting physical disability with 
an Honorable characterization of service. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a change to your narrative 
reason for separation to reflect a disability discharge. You assert that you developed your heart 
condition while in basic training and have been denied a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 
certificate of eligibility (COE) for a loan due to your discharge status. Unfortunately, the Board 
disagreed with your rationale for relief. First, the Board noted you were discharged for a 
physical disability and this is documented in your record. Second, the Board found insufficient 
evidence to support a finding that your rheumatic heart disease with mitral insufficiency was 
developed while on active duty. This finding was based on your medical history which showed 
you suffered from rheumatic fever at age eight and showed symptoms of your condition within 
days of reporting to basic training. Based on these two factors, the Board concluded that the 
preponderance of the evidence supports the 24 September 1975 medical board findings that your 
condition preexisted your entry into the Navy. Third, the Board was not persuaded an injustice 
exists in your record based on the VA’s decision to deny you a COE for a VA loan. The VA’s 
decision not to accept your DD Form 214 as evidence of a disability discharge is an 
administrative decision by another government agency that does not mandate a change to your 
record. In the Board’s opinion, your disability discharge was properly documented on a 
NAVPERS 1070/614 form and contained in your military record. Accordingly, the Board found 
insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. 

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 matters, 
which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149. New matters are those not 
previously presented to or 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.