Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07884-06
Original file (07884-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2NAVYANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


 TRG
 Docket No:7884-06
 14 June 2007





Dear
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 12 June 2007. 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 enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve on 13 October 1965 at age 20, reported for your initial period of active duty for training on 22 October 1965, and were released from active duty on 20 April 1966. This period totaled 5 months and 28 days. The record shows that you earned five consecutive qualifying years for reserve retirement. On 13 October 1970 you transferred to a non-drilling status and were honorably discharged on 12 October 1971. A copy of a summary of your service is enclosed.
You are requesting in your application that you be given three days of active duty during the period from 24 to 26 March 1970 when your unit was mobilized to augment the U. S. Postal Service when the postal workers were on strike. However, your record contains an entry, dated 24 March 1970, which states that you were not mobilized at that time. Another entry, dated 12 October 1970, states that you were on the rolls of the unit, but were not mobilized for the postal crisis due to your civilian occupation. Given the passage of time no other information is available. Therefore, the Board concluded that you were not eligible for the additional active duty credit.
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







 Enclosure
































2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04028-07

    Original file (04028-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 January 2008. 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. On 12 February 1970, the Navy Clemency and Parole Board mitigated your DD to a bad conduct discharge (BCD), and directed your immediate release from confinement.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07352-06

    Original file (07352-06.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 April 2007. 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 | CY2006 | 08092-06

    Original file (08092-06.rtf) 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.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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 8 October 1969 at age 17. However, your request was denied and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001804

    Original file (20150001804.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant's military service records are not available to the Board for review. The applicant signed the document verifying the accuracy of the information recorded on the DD Form 214. c. Based on the above and the available evidence of record, it is concluded that the DD Form 214 correctly shows the applicant's active duty service during this period (emphasis added) and rank/grade at the time he was released from active duty. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10680-09

    Original file (10680-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 July 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05608-06

    Original file (05608-06.rtf) 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Navy Personnel Command dated 21 August 2007, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00290-10

    Original file (00290-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were not physically qualified for release from active duty on 2 October 2008, or that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability on 27 May 2009, when you were discharged by reason of physical fitness assessment failure, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04653-08

    Original file (04653-08.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 February 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, togethér with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 10 January 1966, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of unsuitability, and recommended a general...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2484 14

    Original file (NR2484 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2015. 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01324-10

    Original file (01324-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 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...