DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
oa
Docket No. 03004-10
9 June 2011
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 2 June
2011. 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.
You reenlisted in the Navy on 6 March 1998 with more than eight years
of prior active service. You underwent a pre-separation physical
examination on 13 May 2000 and were found qualified for separation
notwithstanding your diagnoses of elevated serum cholesterol,
defective visual acuity and adjustment disorder with depressed mood.
You were dishonorably discharged from the Navy on 13 September 2004
upon completion of the appellate review of your conviction by general
court-martial; unfortunately, the facts and circumstances of your
conviction were not available to the Board. On 13 April 2010 the
- ~~ &
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determined that your
dishonorable discharge was a statutory bar to VA benefit entitlement.
The Board was not persuaded that you were unfit for duty by reason
of physical disability at the time of your discharge, or that the
offenses which resulted in your discharge were caused by or related
to the effects of undiagnosed posttraumatic stress disorder. The
Board noted that you would not have been entitled to disability
separation or retirement even if you had been unfit for duty because
your punitive separation would have taken precedence over disability
“evaluation proces#ing. Accordingly, your application has been
denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
furnished upon , mequest |
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,
W. DEAN PF
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00684-06
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. It found that even if you had been unfit for duty at that time, you would not have been entitled to disability separation or retirement, because your bad conduct discharge would have taken precedence over and precluded disability processing. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
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 | CY2010 | 07885-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 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 | CY2010 | 11220-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2011. The fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you separate ratings of 10% for asthma from 13 February 1992, headaches from 12 April 1996, and allergic rhinitis from 7 October 1996, as well as 70% for posttraumatic stress disorder from 30 August 2004, is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy record because...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05392-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2011. Your receipt of disability compensation from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record. 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 | CY2013 | NR8290 13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Dac Docket No. ‘A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 December 2014. 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 | 00378-08
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 VA did not determine that you were insane when you committed the offenses which 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 or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07751-07
You were sentenced to be discharged from the Marine Corps with a bad conduct discharge. You were separated from the Marine Corps with a bad conduct discharge on 24 February 1971, upon completion of appellate review. 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 | CY2011 | 01803-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 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 | CY2010 | 03071-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 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...