DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No: 5067-
02
4 March 2003
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 24
January 2003. 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 enlisted in the Navy on 3 January 1979. You
received nonjudicial punishment on four occasions for a variety of
offenses, and were convicted by special court-martial of willful
destruction of property, two specifications of assault, and
communicating a threat to kill. You were separated from the Navy with
a bad conduct discharge on 10 November 1983. The Board could not find
any indication in the available records that you were “mentally sick”
at that time, or unfit for duty. It noted that even if you had been
unfit, you would not have been entitled to be referred to the
disability evaluation system, because a punitive discharge takes
precedence over such processing. It also noted that the Department of
Veterans Affairs has independently determined that you were sane when
you committed the offenses resulting in your discharge, and that your
service was performed under dishonorable conditions.
In the absence of evidence warranting the upgrade of your discharge,
and demonstrating that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical
disability at the time of your discharge, the Board was unable to
recommend 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08120-05
The Board’s review was limited to your request for disability retirement, as you have not exhausted an available administrative remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board for upgrade of your discharge to honorable.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support...
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 | CY2005 | 06153-05
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 underwent a pre-enlistment physical examination on 23 June 2001 and were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09976-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 January 2003. 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 were found unfit for duty by the Physical Evaluation Board, acting for the Secretary of the Navy.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06910-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. Although you were treated for colitis during your enlistment, the available records fail to demonstrate that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability on 12 August 2003. 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 | CY2008 | 06657-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. The Board also noted that on 17 June 2003 the VA was notified that you had been discharged from the naval service without entitlement to disability severance pay. The Board concluded that the presence of your address in documents the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provided to the Marine Corps did not relieve you of the responsibility of ensuring...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06301-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 2007. On 9 July 2004, you were advised that you were being recommended for discharge by reason of the personality disorder, and misconduct/drug abuse. 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 | CY2003 | 06064-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 October 2003. The fact that the VA has given you a disability for the residuals of your knee injury is not probative of error or injustice in your military record, because the VA awards disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06453-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2003. The fact that the VA has awarded you substantial disability ratings is not probative of the existence of error in your Navy record, because the VA assigns disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03060-03
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 Navy on 5 June 1981. In the absence of evidence that...