Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06402-05
Original file (06402-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                  BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                   2 NAVY ANNEX
                   WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~51OO
         

         JRE
 Docket No. 06402-05
 10 October      2006
         

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 f or Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2006. 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 Marine Corps as an enlisted member from 27 May 1997 to 18 February 2000, and as an officer candidate in the Navy from 19 February to 22 June 2000. You were commissioned as an ensign in the Navy on 23 June 2000. You were convicted by special court-martial on 23 October 2001 of wrongful possession of a firearm and ammunition on a military installation. On 24 October 2001, you submitted a request for resignation in lieu of separation processing. Your request was accepted by the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Manpower and Reserve Affairs on 5 February 2002, and you were separated from the Navy by reason of misconduct on 31 March 2002 with an general discharge.
The Board was not persuaded that you were unfit for further service by reason of physical disability, despite the fact that you were being treated for depression at the time of your discharge, or that the misconduct which resulted in your discharge was caused or significantly mitigated by your depressive disorder. The Board noted that even if you had been unfit for duty at the time in question, you would not have been entitled to disability retirement or separation, because a discharge by reason of misconduct would have precluded disability processing. The Board concluded that your service was appropriately characterized as under honorable conditions in view of your conviction by special court-martial and resignation in lieu of separation processing that could have resulted in a discharge under other than honorable conditions. The Board concluded that it would not be in the interest of justice for it to recommend that your discharge be upgraded to honorable.
In view of the foregoing, 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 Dir ector

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002150

    Original file (20090002150.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states, in effect, that new information based on a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determination, dated 8 December 2004, was not available at the time of his discharge indicating he was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and deep-seated depression as a direct result of his combat experience during the Persian Gulf War and should be considered. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090002150 3 ARMY...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05838-05

    Original file (05838-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2006. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) denied your request for service connection for a back condition on 26 November 1996 and 18 February 2000, and for depression anda back condition on 23 October 2001. 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 | 05991-02

    Original file (05991-02.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2003. After reviewing the report of that examination on 14 April 2000, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of residuals of your cancer, which it rated at 0%. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...

  • 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 00707-08

    Original file (00707-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The recommendation for discharge was approved by the separation authority, who directed that you be discharged by reason of misconduct/commission of a serious offense, with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. The Board did not consider whether your discharge should be upgraded to general or honorable since you have not exhausted an available administrative remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04090-09

    Original file (04090-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2010. In this regard, the Board noted that the VA assigned ratings to the lumbosacral strain and radiculopathy without regard to the issue of your fitness to reasonably perform military duty prior to your discharge, and that the rating you received for a mood disorder was based on your condition more than eighteen months after you were discharged from...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00272-08

    Original file (00272-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2008. 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 demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130021602

    Original file (20130021602.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He has been an exemplary Soldier until the breakdown he had in Iraq. The Secretary directed him to be discharged from the United States Army with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing in the Remarks block of his DD Form 214: * SERVICE IN IRAQ: 20120402 -20120630 * Prior active duty service from 20110228 - 20120402 2.