DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Y
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No: 6232-99
21 August 2000
Dear
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 17 August 2000. 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. In this connection, it was unable to accept your contentions concerning the
circumstances of your accident, as those contentions were not credible. The Board noted that
you were hypothermic when admitted to a hospital’s resuscitation on 20 November 1993,
which is consistent with your being exposed to elements in an intoxicated
and unconscious
state for the previous nine to eleven hours, as the record shows.
would have become hypothermic during the one to two hour period immediately preceding
your rescue, as you imply. As you have not demonstrated that the line of duty/misconduct
findings made in your case are erroneous, the Board was unable to recommend any
corrective action. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of
the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is unlikely that you
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00949-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 November 2001. 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 | CY2001 | 04853-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 August 2000. Documentary material considered by the Board sub’mitted in support thereof, your consisted of your application, together with all material 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 | CY2008 | 06187-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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 | CY2001 | 04682-00
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 5 July 2000, a copy of which is attached. (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing Concerning Report A, the petitioner argues and not per established performance The petitioner contends that the challenged fitness reports 2. are inaccurate, unjust, evaluation policy. the presence of the petitioner and his he facts/c and Colone - s as 2 Subj: MARINE...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08667-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 August 2001. 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 | CY2001 | 02949-01
You state but you asserted that you Subsequently, the Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals, discharged by reason of erroneous enlistment. differently than others discharged under similar circumstances, the board could find no error or injustice in your assigned reenlistment code. 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 | CY2002 | 05509-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 2003. 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 | CY2007 | 02361-07
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 6 August 1997. The administrative...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03029-03
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted Your allegations of error and 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. It noted that even if you had been unfit, you would not have It was been entitled to disability evaluation processing, because a discharge by reason of misconduct take precedence over In the absence of evidence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04012-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The PEB made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability incurred as a result of your own misconduct, and therefore not ratable. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...