Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07776-10
Original file (07776-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

JRE
Docket No. 07776-09

1 November 2010

  
   
   
 
   
 
 
   
   
    
  
   
  

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 28
October 2010. 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 served on active duty in the Marine Corps from 16 June to 4 October
1967, when you received an undesirable discharge by reason of
misconduct due to your fraudulent entry into the Marine Corps.
Following your discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs awarded
you a combined disability rating of 0% for residuals of a bilateral

condition of your upper extremities.

The Board could not find any indication in the available records that
you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability on 4 October
1967. It noted that you would not have been entitled to disability
separation or retirement even if you had been unfit for duty because
your discharge by reason of misconduct would have taken precedence
over and precluded disability evaluation processing. In addition,
the Board was not persuaded your discharge by reason of fraudulent
enlistment was erroneous or unjust, or that it would be in the
interest of justice for the Board to upgrade your discharge.
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,

W. DEAN pny

Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04190-09

    Original file (04190-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 19 June 1951, your commanding officer submitted a presumption of fraudulent enlistment report that revealed you erroneously enlisted in the Marine Corps having been discharged from the Air Force by reason of physical disability. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01942-10

    Original file (01942-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval recore 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 | 00378-08

    Original file (00378-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 03898-10

    Original file (03898-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    03898-10 4 May 2010 A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 2010. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01659-10

    Original file (01659-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11, March 2010. 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 ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07326-09

    Original file (07326-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2010. You underwent a pre-separation physical examination on 29 March 2005 and were found physically qualified for separation. 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 | CY2006 | 08406-06

    Original file (08406-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    08406-06 22 October 2007DearThis 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 12 October 2007. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10406-09

    Original file (10406-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE Docket No. 10406-0939 20 July 2010 De qr

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07751-07

    Original file (07751-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 12878 11

    Original file (12878 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 4 October 2012. In addition it noted that you could have been processed for separation by reason of fraudulent entry based on your concealment of what you believed to be a pre-service history of asthma. 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...