DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
JRE
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
Docket No: 8662-00
29 October 2001
Dear ‘Allie
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 4 October 2001. 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 from 1 September 1978 to 7 November
1980, when you were discharged under honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct/frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. You had
received non-judicial punishment on three occasions, and you were convicted by a summary
court-martial. You were diagnosed as suffering from a personality disorder, a condition
which is not classified as a physical disability, and did not render you mentally incompetent
or excuse your misconduct. The recent determination by the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) that you suffer from a mental disorder that began during your naval service was of no
probative value to the Board. The reasoning upon which the VA based its decision is of
questionable validity, and it does not establish that you were unfit by reason of physical
disability at the time of your discharge. In this regard, the Board noted further that even if
you had been unfit for duty at that time, you would not have been eligible for disability
evaluation processing, because a discharge for misconduct takes precedence over such
processing. 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05283-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2009 | 06638-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2010. 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 | 00216-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2001. consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, limited portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board was not persuaded that you suffered from post traumatic stress disorder in 1945 that you were unfit for duty in 1950 because of a disability which was incurred...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06155-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 August 2001. service or alleged murder-related post traumatic stress disorder to the VA rating officials. The Board was not persuaded that the misconduct which resulted in your discharge from the Navy was caused by or related to undiagnosed mental disorder, that your misconduct was significantly extenuated or mitigated by your mental state, or that you were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02290-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit for duty. 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 | CY2001 | 00101-01
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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06513-06
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 | CY2008 | 00734-08
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09530-06
As you did not submit any new material evidence in support of your reconsideration request, the Board limited its review to your new request.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 October 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.After...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8290 13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Dac Docket No. ‘A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 December 2014. 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.