Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07328-02
Original file (07328-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2  NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

JRE
Docket No: 7328-02
22 October 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
10 October 2002. Your allegations of error and
session, considered your application on  
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board.
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your
naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

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.

The Board found that you served on active duty from 27 December 1991 to 25 February
1994, when you were discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct. Your service was characterized as under other than honorable conditions based
on your commission of a serious offense, namely, assaulting another person with a shotgun.
The Board noted that you were not entitled to be processed for separation or retirement by
reason of physical disability, because a discharge by reason of misconduct takes precedence
over disability evaluation.
In addition, it noted that even if you had not been discharged by
reason of misconduct, you would not have qualified for disability benefits administered by the
Department of the Navy, as your injury was the result of your own misconduct, and not
incurred in the line of duty.

The Board rejected your unsubstantiated contentions to the effect that you did not receive
appropriate representation from your attorney, or that he improperly encouraged you to waive
your right to contest your discharge by requesting a hearing before an administrative
discharge board.

In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your discharge by

reason of misconduct was erroneous or unjust, and establishes that your condition was
incurred in the line of duty, 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



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04012-01

    Original file (04012-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07900-08

    Original file (07900-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 August 2009. The Board noted that while a reentry code of RE-3P may be assigned when a Marine is discharged for such condition as obesity and motions sickness, as you allege, it is also assigned when a Marine is discharged by reason of physical disability. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12114-08

    Original file (12114-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2009. The Board did not accept your contention to the effect that a line of duty investigation (LODI) was not conducted in your case. 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 | CY2006 | 07156-06

    Original file (07156-06.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 enlisted in the Marine Corps on 1 March 1989. It noted that you would not...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10102-06

    Original file (10102-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board found that on 23 October 1985, the Central Physical Evaluation Board (CPEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of the residuals of injuries to the cervical spine that you sustained on 8 December 1984 in a motor vehicle accident, and that the disabilities were not ratable because you were injured as a result of your own misconduct. VA rating official denied your request, based on their determination that your disabilities were residual to the injuries...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00914-01

    Original file (00914-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 January 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 | CY2001 | 07108-00

    Original file (07108-00.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. In this connection it substantially concurred with the The Board was not persuaded that the line of duty(LOD)/misconduct determination made in your case is erroneous or unjust. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08519-02

    Original file (08519-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 2002. consisted of your application, together with all material submitted 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07565-02

    Original file (07565-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board 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. The Board found that you underwent a pre-enlistment physical examination on 19 July 2000. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • 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. ...