Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03255-08
Original file (03255-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
NT_OPS
Soe .
Poe
OS \

ON
As
2) TY a

  

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

JRE
Docket No. 03255-08
19 March 2009

 

 

This ig 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 5 March 2009. 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. The Board was unable to obtain your

service health record from its custodian, the Department of
Veterans Affairs.

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 from 2 February 1968 to 30 January 1970, when you were
released from active duty and transferred to the Marine Corps
Reserve. There is no indication in the available records that
you were wounded in action as you allege in your application.

Phe Board concluded that your uncorroborated statement is
insulfiecient to demonstrate that you were wounded while serving
in Vietnam. 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 net 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,

\ Monee

W. DEAN PFE
Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07604-08

    Original file (07604-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2009. 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 | CY2009 | 10209-09

    Original file (10209-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2009. 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 | CY2009 | 05939-09

    Original file (05939-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that your record be corrected to show that your right hand was wounded, rather than your left. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2009. 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 | CY2010 | 08319-10

    Original file (08319-10.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 March 2011. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating at the time of separation or retirement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08130-08

    Original file (08130-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 2009. 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. A special court-martial convened on 26 February 1965 and convicted you of two periods of unauthorized absence totaling about 140 days and conduct...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09714-08

    Original file (09714-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2009. The Board found that you enlisted in the US Marine Corps Reserve (USMCR) on 17 November 1971, and served on initial active duty for training from 18 November 1971 to 16 May 1972. The VA rating officials noted that you had submitted an altered copy of a DD Form 214 which purported to establish that you had served in Vietnam, when in fact you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09422-08

    Original file (09422-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Coxrection of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2009. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit to reasonably perform your duties at the time of your release from active duty, the Board was unable to recommend corrective action 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06618-09

    Original file (06618-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2010. On 21 March 1973 you were notified by the Commandant of the Marine Corps that as your disability was considered permanent and ratable at less than thirty percent, you would be discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay effective 31 March 1973. Consequentiy, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05692-08

    Original file (05692-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navai Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2009. As noted above, you accepted the initial findings of the PEB, waived your right to a hearing, and acknowledged that you would be separated or retired by reason of physical disability. 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 | CY2002 | 06282-00

    Original file (06282-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You continued to serve in the Marine Corps and whea you You were honorably discharged on During this period you Individuals discharged for unsuitability received the type of Character of service discharge warranted by the service record. The Board also noted your In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and immaturity, subsequent honorable service in Vietnam in which you were twice wounded in combat, and your...