Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00856-07
Original file (00856-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

JRE
Docket No. 00856-07

19 February 2008

 

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 14 February 2008. 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 from 26 July 1967
to 23 July 1971, and 23 September 1974 to 22 September 1976. You

were discharged from the Navy Reserve on 8 December 1983. On 13
March 2003, the Department of Veterans Affairs determined that

you were entitled to a special monthly pension due to your need
for aid and attendance because of the residual effects of a non-

service connected cerebral vascular accident.

In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were
unfit for service by reason of physical disability due to a
condition or conditions incurred while you were entitled to
basis pay, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective
action in your case. Accordingly, your application has been
denied.

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,

Loukas

W. DEAN PFEIL
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00338-08

    Original file (00338-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 August 2008. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found 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 material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01517-08

    Original file (01517-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 2008. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found 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 material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0649 14

    Original file (NR0649 14.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 June 2014. 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. You were separated on 15 July 2011, with an honorable discharge due to non-retention on active duty and assigned an RE-3C (when directed by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08171-07

    Original file (08171-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 2008. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07617-07

    Original file (07617-07.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 July 2008. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01488-08

    Original file (01488-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2008. On 13 January 1988, you were discharged at the end of your enlistment and received an honorable discharge, and an RE-4 reenlistment code, due to your previous disciplinary actions. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07811-07

    Original file (07811-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 8 February 2002, you were once again counseled about your conduct and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative separation action. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08398-07

    Original file (08398-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 September 2008. 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 | CY1999 | 05065-09

    Original file (05065-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 July 2008, a second mental health evaluation was conducted to confirm the previous results with no change. Based on the mental health evaluation, you were processed for separation by reason of a diagnosed personality disorder. 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 | 01189-08

    Original file (01189-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 2008. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found 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 material...