NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00449-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 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. However, on 15 April 1971, you received your fourth NUP for being in a UA status.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00450-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX JRE WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No. Your request must include newly discovered relevant evidence which was not reasonably available to you when you submitted your application. Absent such additional evidence, further review of your application is not possible.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00453-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 2010. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00454-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 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 the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00455-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 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 the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00457-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No. Pfeiffer, Exnicios, and George, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 4 June 2010 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. 00457-10 RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected, where appropriate, to show that: a. Petitioner is authorized the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00459-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 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 the .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00462-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 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 the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00463-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 2010. On 22 December 2009, you were discharged with an entry level separation from active duty due to erroneous entry. 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 | 00465-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 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. On 24 September 1984, you were so discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00466-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, ‘sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2011. Its assignment in your case does not imply that you were released from jactive duty for medical reasons or that you were separated or retired ‘by reason of physical disability. 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 | 00468-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 2010. The discharge authority directed the execution of your 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00470-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 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. The discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00472-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 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 the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00473-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge and your reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00475-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 2011. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00476-10
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. Finally, the Board denied your request to be allowed to retire. On 15 August 2007, your appeal was denied and you were separated with a dismissal due to your conviction at a GCM.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00480-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 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 the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00483-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 16 February 2010 with enclosures, a copy of which is attached. 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 | 00485-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 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 the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00491-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 MEH Docket No. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to establish entitlement to retroactive Board Certified Pay (BCP). The Board, consisting of Messrs. Exnicios, George, and Zsalman, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00494-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON BC 20370-5100 DIC Docket No. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show he reenlisted USN vice USNR. The Board, consisting of Mr. Exnicios, Mr. Zsalman, and Mr. George, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 16 February 2010...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00499-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00500-10
On 14 March 2005, you were notified that administrative discharge procedures were initiated and that you would receive a reenlistment code of RE-4 for your pattern of misconduct upon your separation. The Board found that since your discharge is less than 15 years old you are entitled to submit the attached Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States (DD Form 293) to the Naval Council of Personnel Review Boards, Attention: Naval Discharge...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00510-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 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 the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00511-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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 ijs on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00516-10
30 March 2010 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OF ° Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting the removal of all references to a nonjudicial punishment (NJP), held on 27 March 2009, from his naval record and removal of a promotion restriction dated 12 June 2009, from the’ Marine Corps Total Force System...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00518-10
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. In this regard, the Board concluded the sentence imposed was fair. 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 | 00521-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 2010. On 28 August 1985, after appellate review, 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 | BCNR | CY2010 | 00526-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 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 the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00529-10
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 4 November 2010. Your request must include newly discovered relevant evidence which was not reasonably available to you when you submitted your application.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00530-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 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. On 21 September 1961, you confessed to participating in homosexual acts and experiences with female Sailors onboard a military installation to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00531-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-51300 SON Docket No: 00531-10 8 April 2010 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy subj i, NAVAL RECORD oc A # Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. However, the Board is aware that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has routinely recommended corrective action when an individual is qualified for reserve retirement and was discharged prior to requesting transfer to the Retired...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00534-10
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 15 May 1974 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 | BCNR | CY2010 | 00544-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 2010. However, you failed to disclose this important information during your enlistment physical. 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 | 00546-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 2010. However, the SARP at Corpus Christi Hospital and your command Drug and Alcohol Program Assistant (DAPA) Ggtermined that you were an alcohol rehabilitation failure and it was recommended that you be separated for not complying with the Peonmended treatment. On 27 February 2008, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00548-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 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 the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00550-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 DIC Docket No. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00557-10
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 20 April 1988, administrative separation action was initiated by reason of misconduct for drug abuse. 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 | 00561-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 2010. Subsequently, your case was forwarded, and on 14 June 1994, the discharge authority approved the recommendation for an OTH 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 | 00564-10
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or LIyUustice., You reenlisted in the Navy on 14 May 1984. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of conviction by SPCM of drug abuse and misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00566-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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. You have not provided a compelling reason as to why you could not or did not wait for funded orders before moving your property.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00567-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2010. After a review of your record, it appears that you were separated correctly. You received an honorable discharge with a reenlistment code of RE-4 upon your separation for a condition not a disability.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00569-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2010. On 25 March 1986, 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 | BCNR | CY2010 | 00570-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2010. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reenlistment code or the characterization of your discharge, given your record of two NJP’s for misconduct. 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 | 00571-10
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that Petitioner was advanced to E5/GM2 from the March 2008, Navy-wide advancement exam. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and Exnicios reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 8 March 2010 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00572-10
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. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative reguiations 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 thereot, your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00573-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 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. In this regard, *n RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00579-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 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 the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00587-10
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Petitioner filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show he was advanced to E-6/IT1 from the March 2009 Navy-wide advancement exam. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and George reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 6 July 2010 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Pursuant...