Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01774-06
Original file (01774-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
         DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
         BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00
         TRG
 Docket No: 1774-06
1 November 2006

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 pane1 of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2006. Your allegations of error and injustice were r viewed 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 Boar found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish he existence of probable material error or injustice.
You enlisted in he delayed entry program (DEP) of the Naval Reserve on 29 September 1987 at age 25. You remained in the DEP until you enlist d in the Navy on 15 March 1988. An entry in your record stat s, in part as follows:
... she desires separation due to the emotional condition o her 3 children and possibility of her In-laws trying to get custody of them. (She) was in the DEP for 7 months and during that time she and her husband experienced financial problems which were being resolved prior to her coming here. (Her) priorities lie with he three children and their well being. (She) is ad ant about going home, which would be in the best interest of all concerned. ... fully explained ELS (Entry Level Separation) RE-4 and its consequences

On 4 April 1988 you were notified of separation processing and stated “I do not object to this separation.” After review, the separation authority directed an entry level separation and you
                   were so separated on 12 April 1988. At that time, you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
You state in your application that your children were being abused by their father and you had to return home to protect them. You desire a correction to the record to show that you completed recruit training so that you can enter that fact on employment applications.
As indicated, the record sets forth sufficient reasons to support your separation from the Navy. Further, it is clear that the separation processing was conducted in accordance with regulations. Since you were properly separated, the Board concluded that a correction to your record was not warranted.
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 PFEIFFER
 Executive Director

















2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00979

    Original file (ND03-00979.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00979 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030513. The next day upon arrival on board I was taken to medical and on the Portsmouth Naval Hospital where I stayed for a week and was given a psychological evaluation contracted for safety and was sent back fit for full duty to my command with the recommendation of alcohol rehabilitation Level 3. The summary of service clearly documents that alcohol rehabilitation failure was the reason the applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00326

    Original file (ND02-00326.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION I tried several times to get some time off so I could take care of these other problems but even after explaining my situation to my Division Chief, he told me the only thing that was important was the inspection and that I would just have to put my problems on hold until after the inspection was over. I had stopped the partying several years back and only had the occasional drink from time to time.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00870-01

    Original file (00870-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    870-01 24 January 2002 Dear Mr.- This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. considered your application on Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 16 January 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 3...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101994

    Original file (0101994.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 31 August 2001, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within thirty (30) days. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501203

    Original file (ND0501203.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND05-01203 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050713. I feel that “no waiver for psych “ had a direct impact on the reason for my Discharge as Erroneous Enlistment. SR is suitable to report to Separations Division.021213: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by a borderline personality disorder.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501404

    Original file (ND0501404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 041105: Performance Remarks: Applicant has been evaluated at REU because of a referral from medical. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01498

    Original file (ND03-01498.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01498 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030917. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Houston County Sheriff’s record check Macon County Sheriff’s record check 54 pages from Applicant’s service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101860

    Original file (ND1101860.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks an RE code and discharge upgrade to re-enlist in the U.S. Armed Forces.2. Therefore, an Uncharacterized discharge is considered the most appropriate characterization of service.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and the administrative separation process, the Board found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1997_Navy | ND97-01361

    Original file (ND97-01361.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND97-01361 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 970909, requested that the reason for her discharge be changed to “by reason of convenience of the Government ‘hardship’”. Upon request of member. D. SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Manual for Discharge Review 1984, Chapter 9, Standards for Discharge Review, paragraph 9.3, Equity of the Discharge, states, in part, that a discharge shall be deemed to be equitable unless in the course of a discharge review, it...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00475

    Original file (ND04-00475.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00475 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040128. 001122: Commanding Officer recommended discharge with an honorable by reason of commission of a serious offense and convenience of the Government due to parenthood or custody of minor children. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).Issue 1: The Applicant...