DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 00378-08
22 August 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 21 August 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 enlisted in the Marine Corps on 1 June
1990. It appears that your enlistment was fraudulent, in that
you procured it by concealing your extensive pre-service history
of evaluation and treatment of disqualifying mental disorders.
You were discharged by reason of misconduct/pattern of
misconduct on 11 October 1991, with a discharge under other than
honorable conditions. The discharge was based on your record of
three instances of nonjudicial punishment for a variety of
offenses, to include multiple unauthorized absences,
insubordinate conduct, and failure to obey lawful orders.
On 2 June 1994, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
determined that your naval service was performed under
dishonorable conditions, and that you were barred from receiving
benefits administered by that agency. The VA did not determine
that you were insane when you committed the offenses which
resulted in your discharge.
The Board was not persuaded that you were unfit for duty by
reason of physical disability that was incurred in or aggravated
beyond natural progression by your period of naval service. It
noted that you would not have been entitled to disability
separation or retirement even if you had been unfit, because
your discharge by reason of misconduct would have taken
precedence over disability evaluation processing. In addition,
the Board had no basis for concluding that you lacked mental
responsibility for your actions.
In view of the foregoing, 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,
Loa
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Dike@ctor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03820-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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 | CY2007 | 08273-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 2008. The Board noted that even if you had been unfit for duty, you would not have been entitled to disability separation or retirement, because your discharge by reason of misconduct would have taken precedence over disability evaluation processing. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02955-07
02955-07 19 May 2008This 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 17 April 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08273-07
08273-07 24 July 2008This 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 24 July 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11027-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2008. Upon completion of the evaluation, you were given a diagnosis of a personality disorder, and recommended for administrative discharge. 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 | 06117-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 2010. 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 | CY2008 | 00309-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2008. The Board could not find any indication in your naval record that you suffered from a significant mental 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 | CY2007 | 02275-07
02275-0727 May 2008This 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 May 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00251 12
On or about 30 June 2005, the Naval Discharge Review Board denied your request for upgrade of your discharge. The available records do not establish that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability at the time of your discharge, or that you lacked mental when you committed the offense that resulted in your discharge. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08210-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2008. You were separated from the Navy with a bad conduct discharge on 31 January 1997. 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.