Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05472-10
Original file (05472-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

JRE
Docket No. 05472-10
25 March 2011

 

Bitan Mees der tei ng

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. You requested that your record be corrected to
show, in effect, that you were separated or retired by reason of
physical disability, vice discharged under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 March
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. The Board did not
reconsider your previously denied request for upgrade of your

discharge because you did not submit any new material evidence in
that regard.

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 could not find any evidence in the available records which is
probative of your contention that you suffered from bipolar affective
disorder while serving in the Navy in the 1980s. 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,

LO Noak

W. DEAN PFE R
Executive D ctor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04705-10

    Original file (04705-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As you did not submit any new material evidence in support of your request for further consideration of your original application, the Board did not reconsider that portion of your request. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your new request for correction of your record on 3 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13006-10

    Original file (13006-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board did not consider your request for correction of your reentry code, as that request was previously denied, and you have not submitted any new material evidence concerning that request. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 April 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11475-10

    Original file (11475-10.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. 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 | CY2014 | NR5235 14

    Original file (NR5235 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your reconsideration request on 28 April 2014. Although the information you provided was new, it was not material information that would change the Board's original decision and your reconsideration request has been denied. 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 | CY2010 | 03672-10

    Original file (03672-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2011 | 02109-11

    Original file (02109-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 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 | 08672-10

    Original file (08672-10.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. 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 | 08155-10

    Original file (08155-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 2011. The Board concluded that those factors in your case are insufficient to warrant an upgrade of your discharge, given your drug use. 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 | 04373-11

    Original file (04373-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 2011. You served on active duty in the Navy from 29 December 1986 to 1 March 1988, when you were discharged by reason of pregnancy. 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 | 01835-11

    Original file (01835-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 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...