DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 6211-08
26 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 13 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 Navy on 30 January 1997.
On 30 June 1998 you underwent a psychological evaluation and were
given a diagnosis of a personality disorder, not otherwise
specified, with narcissistic and immature features. On 8 July
1998 you accepted the finding of a physical evaluation board
(PEB) that you were fit for duty notwithstanding your chronic
back pain. You received nonjudicial punishment on 16 July 1998
for two instances of disrespect to petty officers, grabbing the
throat and striking the face of a petty officer, and
communicating a threat to “choke the shit” out of, snap the neck
of, and kill the petty officer whom you assaulted.
On 16 July 1998 your commanding officer recommended that you be
separated from the Navy with a general discharge by reason of
misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. When
informed of this recommendation, you elected to waive the right
to submit a statement in response to the recommendation for
discharge. After review by the discharge authority, the
recommendation for separation was approved and on 28 July 1998
you received a general discharge.
The Board carefully considered your contentions to the effect
that you were to receive a medical discharge, and that you were
unfairly targeted because of your “status while awaiting a
medical discharge”, but found them insufficient to warrant
upgrading your discharge or changing its basis. As
noted above,
you were found fit for duty by the PEB, and were not awaiting a
medical separation. In addition, there is no credible evidence
that you were unfairly targeted because of your medical status.
The Board concluded that you were fortunate to have
general discharge, given the serious nature of your
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case
favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled
received a
misconduct.
names and
upon request.
are such that
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,
Wonk
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Dir r
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00318-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 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 | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500946
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00355
Please reevaluate my discharge.After review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, the FSM request to have his discharge upgraded from General Under Honorable Conditions to one of Honorable.As the FSM service organization, it is our contention that the General discharge awarded to the FSM is unjust due to the untimely persecution of the FSM. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04548-00
As noted by diagnosis of migraine that in itself is not synonymous with disability the member's headaches are "generally not Even stipulating arguendo that the member has a headaches the evaluating physician, incapacitating and she is able to continue working through the pain." The member also testified that No one has found any reason for The member has had a CBC, bone panel, HLAB-27, all of which have been within normal limits The member has had two epidural injections 5/5 in all muscle...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05523-07
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. On 31 August 1990, you were so discharged. 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 | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301116
The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was more lenient than what others received and determined an upgrade was not warranted. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06411-02
As you may kn fitness for military duty cases where the service presumption of fitness, disorder were considered insufficient to warrant any corrective ove, you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty, isability separation or retirement of a service member. The Veterans Administration and the Gulf War Health rked up these multiple medical problems without definitely defining was found “fit” for retirement, his case was not referred to the PEB r not he was eligible for medical...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00799-02
A medical board was prepared in January 1998 and PEB's Record Review Panel In June, 1998, the forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for consideration. Lumbar Decompression and Low Back Pain Status Post Fusion (72420) The Record Review Panel found the member unfit for duty under VA Code 5295, rated his condition at 10% disability and separation pay. However, Therefore, after careful consideration of all relevant medical evidence, viewed in a .light most favorable to the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03392-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2002. The members of the chain of command were present, made statements and were available to answer questions . He then told LT HI who then called Ms. D. The Board also considered the statement of the retired chief petty officer who stated that you were not derelict in your duties while you were treating him and that he did not see any disrespect.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02968-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2008. However, in your absence, you were still sentenced to a bad conduct discharge (BCD). 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.