Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08483-05
Original file (08483-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100




JRE
Docket No. 08483-05
9 February 2007




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 8 February 2907. 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. In this regard, the Board found that that you were not entitled to be discharged by reason of physical disability because your discharge under honorable conditions by reasons of misconduct took precedence over disability processing. You were discharged by reason of a pattern of misconduct, as evidenced by three instances of nonjudicial punishment and a conviction by summary court-martial, for multiple offenses. Notwithstanding your belief to the contrary, there are no provisions of law for the automatic upgrading of a discharge.

As you have not demonstrated that you were discharged in error, or that it would be in the interest of justice for the Board to upgrade your discharge from general to honorable, it 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,
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02361-07

    Original file (02361-07.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 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 6 August 1997. The administrative...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04425-10

    Original file (04425-10.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 February 2011. You enlisted in the Navy on 21 September 2005. 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 | CY2009 | 06910-09

    Original file (06910-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2009 | 09970-09

    Original file (09970-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. The Naval Discharge Review Board denied your request for upgrade of your discharge on or about 4 February 2000. 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 | CY2009 | 00868-09

    Original file (00868-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 2009. The Board could not find any indication in the available records that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability on 22 October 1991. 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 | CY2001 | 03203-00

    Original file (03203-00.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 June 2001. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit for further service by reason of physical disability at the time of your discharge, and that your discharge by reason of misconduct was erroneous or unjust, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06402-05

    Original file (06402-05.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 on active duty in the Marine Corps as an enlisted member from 27...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 10150-05

    Original file (10150-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 2007. As a discharge by reason of misconduct takes precedence over disability processing, and as there is no indication in the available records 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05131-10

    Original file (05131-10.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 February 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 12247-10

    Original file (12247-10.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 February 2011. 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...