Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07156-06
Original file (07156-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


JRE
Docket No. 07156-06
2 July 2007


Dear

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 28 June 2007. 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 Marine Corps on 1 March 1989. You received nonjudicial punishment on one occasion, and were convicted by summary court-martial. Your offenses included disrespect to a non-commissioned officer, disobedience of an order, unauthorized absence, and breaking restriction. You sustained an accidental self inflicted gunshot wound to your right hand on 1 January 1980. On 23 July 1990, it was held that your injury was incurred as a result of your own misconduct, as it was the result of your negligent handling of a loaded weapon while intoxicated. You underwent a pre-separation physical examination on 19 September 1990, and were found physically qualified for discharge, notwithstanding the residuals of the accidental gunshot wound. You were discharged by reason of misconduct on 11 October 1990, with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. The Naval Discharge Review Board denied your request for upgrade of your discharge on 28 May 1993.








The Board concluded that you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability at the time of your discharge. It noted that you would not have been entitled to disability benefits administered by the Department of the Navy in any event, because your injury was incurred as the result of your own misconduct and not in the line of duty, and because a discharge by reason of misconduct takes precedence over disability processing. Accordingly, and as you have not demonstrated that it would be in the interest of justice for the Board to upgrade your discharge, 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 | CY2006 | 05464-06

    Original file (05464-06.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 were evaluated by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) on 18 January 2006...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06016-01

    Original file (06016-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD X 2 NAVY ANNE S WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 ELP Docket No. 6016-01 8 February 2002 Dear

  • 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 | CY2014 | NR2428 14

    Original file (NR2428 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 §. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that he is entitled to combat-related special ° compensation (CRSC) for the injuries he sustained in a live fire training accident on 19 January 2012. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06738-09

    Original file (06738-09.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. As you have not demonstrated that your disability should have been rated at 30% or higher on 31 October 1977, which would have qualified you for continuation on the TDRL or permanent retirement, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058974C070421

    Original file (2001058974C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. WD AGO Form 106 shows that on 21 April 1946 the applicant submitted a claim to The Adjutant General for the Purple Heart on the basis that he “was wounded in the left hand. Rating decision papers from the VA show that the applicant was awarded disability as a result of a gunshot wound of the left hand which was determined to have been incurred in service during World War II.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00788

    Original file (BC-2005-00788.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In this respect, we note that the Purple Heart (PH) is awarded for wounds received as a direct result of enemy actions that required or received treatment by medical personnel. The applicant contends that his wounds were received in action; however, an entry in the his medical records indicates that on 8 December 1943, he was treated for a gunshot wound to his right leg that was incurred when he was accidentally shot by an Italian soldier. ...

  • 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110017346

    Original file (20110017346.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He also claimed OTI for ADL loss for 30 days, from 18 July to 18 August 2006, due to his gunshot wound. With respect to the ADL loss, by law, for ADL loss to be covered, the loss must be for at least 30 days, the member must require assistance to perform two of six ADLs, the ADL loss must be certified by a healthcare provider and must be substantiated by appropriate documentation such as occupational therapy/physical therapy reports, discharge summaries and other medical documentation. ...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1980-1989 | 8004577

    Original file (8004577.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He also requests that his reduction in pay grade be voided. The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service. That reduction was not associated in any way with his gunshot wound.