DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS$, p
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No. 07073-08
26 January 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 15 January 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.
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 6 April 1976
for four years. You received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) on
four occasions for violations of articles 78, 86 and 134 of the
Uniform Code of Military Justice, and were convicted by two
special courts-martial for lengthy periods of unauthorized
absence. You underwent a pre-separation physical examination on
1 July 1980 and were considered qualified for separation. The
only significant defect noted by the physician who conducted the
examination was your need for eyeglasses. You were separated
from the Navy on 16 July 1981, with a bad conduct discharge. You
completed 3 years, 11 months and 26 days creditable service, and
incurred more than 400 days of time lost.
The Board was not persuaded that you were unfit for duty by
reason of physical disability at the time of your separation
from the Navy. It noted that you would not have been entitled
to disability separation or retirement even if you had been
disabled at that time, as your punitive discharge would have
taken precedence over disability evaluation processing. In
addition, the Board concluded that your service was properly
characterized as under other than honorable conditions, given
your extensive disciplinary record, and that you have not
demonstrated that it would be in the interest of justice for it
to upgrade your discharge to honorable or general. 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 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,
\ Swoon
W. DEAN PFEI
Executive Dir
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06782-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 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 | CY2008 | 02569-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. He was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 11 August 1999 by reason of misconduct/commission of a serious offense. 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 | 08794-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE Docket No. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 July 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02241-09
A, ; A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 1 October 2009. You were discharged under other than honorable conditions on 24 January 1985, by reason of your frequent. ‘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 | 01826-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 February 2009. In this regard, the Board was not persuaded that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability due to a hearing loss or decreased visual acuity at the time of your voluntary discharge from the Navy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02643-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 May 2ooO. You The Board was not persuaded that you were unfit by reason of physical disability at the time of your discharge from the Marine Corps. 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 | 00868-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 2009. The Board could not find any indication in the available records that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability on 22 October 1991. 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 | 07355-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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. You underwent a pre-separation physical examination on 6 December 1988 and were found physically qualified for duty and administrative separation.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04901-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2011. Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for naval service as of 28 October 2009. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06880-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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...