NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR949 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. 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 were sentenced to be reduced in rank from master sergeant (pay grade E-8) to staff sergeant (pay grade E-6).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9501 13
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the United States Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the MDF (pregnancy or childbirth} separation code and RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reentry code issued on 2 May 1994, be upgraded. The Board, consisting of Mr. 4salman, Mr. Rothlein, and Ms. Henkel, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 23 July 2014 and, pursuant to its regulations,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9513 13
* However, as explained in the Board’s previous letter, a case may only be reconsidered upon submission of new and material evidence. Evidence is considered to be material if |.t is likely to have a substantial effect on the outcome of the Board's decision. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) meme 1070 JB Gf 72 Aug 2014, & COPY of which is being provided to you, see enclosure (25) « 1 tn 1983, you had been selected to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9525 13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 791 5. 1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's naval record i. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting a change in his “JHE” (disenrolled from Naval Academy} separation code (SPD) and “RE-4”"” (not recommended ‘for reenlistment) reentry code. The Board, consisting of Mr. Ruskin, Ms. Bianchi, and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9530 13
(3) Subject’s naval record 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enciosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval recora be corrected to established entitlement to payment of 45 days lump sum leave (LSL:) . 2, The Board, consisting of Mr. Zsalman, Mr. George, and Mr. Ruskin, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 12 May ' 2014 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR955 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. 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 then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR960 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. 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 burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR963 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. A 3.0 conduct mark average was required for a fully honorable characterization of service. 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 | NR968 13
The Board did not consider your request to upgrade your discharge and change your narrative reason for separation because you have not exhausted your administrative remedy of applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. On 16 February 2011, you were discharged with a general characterization of service due to unsatisfactory...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR975 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2013. 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 then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR976 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2013. 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 requested a discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions for the good of the service to avoid trial by court- Martial for three periods of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR977 13
*" A three-tiember panel of the Board for Corréction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 March 2013. 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 | CY2013 | NR979 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2013. A 3.0 conduct mark average was required for a fully honorable characterization of service. 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 LnjUSsL.Les.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR983 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2013. You are advised that no discharge is upgraded due merely to the passage of time or post service good conduct. 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 | NR99-13
The Board, acting as a special board, consisting of Ms. Trucco and Messrs. Chapman and Vogt, reviewed Subject’s case on 15 February 2013 and determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), the Deputy Commandant of the Marine Corps for Manpower and Reserve Affairs has recommended correcting Subject’s naval-record—as- follows: er (1) Award him career retirement points for each...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR999 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2013. On 6 March 1992, you were discharged with a general characterization of service due to misconduct, and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reentry code. 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.