Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05860-01
Original file (05860-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370.510

0

JRE
Docket No:  
20 May 2002

5860-01

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 9 May 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 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 in the Navy from 27 August 1996 to 29
August 1997, when you were discharged pursuant to your request for discharge for the good
of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial for an extended absence without authority.

or that it was extenuated or mitigated by the effects of such a

The Board could find no indication in the available records that your misconduct was the
product of a mental disorder,
disorder. It was not persuaded that your discharge was erroneous or unjust. In addition, it
noted that as a discharge for the good of the service takes precedence over disability
evaluation processing, you would not have been entitled to disability processing even if you
had been questionably unfit for duty. 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 | 02370-01

    Original file (02370-01.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. The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 27 April 1977. 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 | 06920-01

    Original file (06920-01.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. An administrative discharge board which convened on 11 July 2001 found that you had committed misconduct due to drug abuse, commission of a serious offense, and driving under the influence of alcohol, and recommended that you be separated from the Navy with a general discharge. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03029-03

    Original file (03029-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2003 | 09105-03

    Original file (09105-03.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 andconscientiousconsideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.moment of truth you revealed that you had a history of asthma, back problems and suicidal behavior,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06072-01

    Original file (06072-01.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 January 2002. 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 injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05262-01

    Original file (05262-01.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. demonstrates that your discharge by reason of misconduct was improper, and establishes that you were unfit to perform your duties by reason of a physical disability which was incurred in or aggravated by your brief period of naval service, the Board was unable to recommend In the absence of evidence which any corrective action in your case. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09126-04

    Original file (09126-04.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.The Board found that on 26 April 2002, the Physical Evaluation Board made preliminary findings that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09097-06

    Original file (09097-06.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.The Board found that you served active duty in the US Army from 6 August 1985 to 21 November 1991,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03096-02

    Original file (03096-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 2002. February 1999, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of the depressive disorder, which it rated at 10% disabling. 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 | 02744-08

    Original file (02744-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 2009. In view of the foregoing, and as you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability at the time of your discharge, the Board was unable to recommend corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...