Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04274-02
Original file (04274-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 

NAVY  

ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

Docket No: 4274-02
19 December 2002

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 12 December 2002. 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
in support thereof, your
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted
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.

Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 13 April 1964. You were evaluated by a
The 
Naval Aptitude Board on 12 May 1964, and found to be unqualified for retention because of
difficulties in adjustment you encountered prior to entering on active duty. You were
discharged by reason of unsuitability on 14 May 1964, pursuant to the approved findings of
the aptitude beard.

In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you suffered from a mental or physical
disorder which was incurred in or aggravated by your brief period of service, and rendered
you unfit by reason of physical disability, as opposed to unsuitable for service, there is no
basis for any corrective action in your case. 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



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04440-01

    Original file (04440-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 2002. 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 | 01492-02

    Original file (01492-02.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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 14 September 1963 for four years at age 17. However, the Board...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05283-01

    Original file (05283-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2008 | 04653-08

    Original file (04653-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, togethér with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 10 January 1966, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of unsuitability, and recommended a general...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09618-02

    Original file (09618-02.pdf) 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. On 25 January 1971 you were notified that separation action was being initiated by reason of unsuitability due to a character and behavior disorder and a defective attitude. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04246-07

    Original file (04246-07.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.On 7 December 1970, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17 with parental consent. Although no...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02036-01

    Original file (02036-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 May 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 | CY2003 | 04381-03

    Original file (04381-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 2003. The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 2 August 1974. 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 | 07039-02

    Original file (07039-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. conducted on 22 January 1965, diagnosed you with a personality disorder. 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 | 07374-01

    Original file (07374-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 April 2002. Documentary material considered by the Board 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...