DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
TRG
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
Docket No: 10493-06
29 January 2008
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 23 January 2008. 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 reenlisted in the Navy Reserve on 16 April 1992. On 22
December 1994 you were notified of discharge processing by reason
of your inability to meet physical standards because of multiple
weight control failures. Subsequently, the recommendation for
your discharge was approved and you were honorably discharged on
17 February 1995 with separation pay in the amount of $14,857.07.
At that time, you had completed 13 years, 6 months and 22 days of
active service. Due to the distribution of the active duty
points between anniversary years, you were credited with 15 years
of service for reserve retirement.
A Statement of Service for Reserve Retirement indicates that you
remained a member of the Navy Reserve until you were honorably
discharged on 4 February 2004. This appears to be erroneous
because you were discharged from the Navy Reserve on 17 February
1995. During this period, you earned no further qualifying
years.
Your record shows that you failed to meet physical standards on
multiple occasions and therefore were properly discharged on 17
February 1995. There is no documentation in your record and you
have submitted none to support your contention that you should
have been retired by reason of a physical disability. The Board
concluded that you were properly discharged and a correction to
your record is 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10627-07
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 22 March 1985 for four years. 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 | CY2002 | 10121-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 January 2003. The Board found that you underwent a pre-enlistment physical examination on 27 March 1995, and denied having a history of “Rupture/Hernia”. 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 | CY2007 | 08210-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2008. You were separated from the Navy with a bad conduct discharge on 31 January 1997. 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 | CY2007 | 02133-07
The Board noted that you will be entitled to retired pay at age 60 as a former member of the Navy Reserve. Although you suffered from a number of medical conditions during your period of naval service, to include the mild left ventricular hypertrophy, a cervical spine condition, and controlled sleep apnea, which the VA rated at 30, 30 and 503%, respectively, there is no indication in the available records that any of those conditions Significantly impaired your ability to perform your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11234-06
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 5 February 1982 for six years. However, the next two evaluations...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05500-00
AEl We reached this conclusion in part because (the CO) submitted a page 13 recording Run convictions and more importantly because (the CO) signed document recorded a second DUI for (the one first class petty officer who he knew had been selected as the Wing Sailor of the Year. mind" or Even (The CO) disregarded Navy policy in frocking (A) to Chief Petty Officer in view of his hit and run convictions. AEl (A)'s Page 13 dated 1 in his microfiche COMNAVAIRPAC take (M) , against...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10920-07
When you were informed of the command's intent to deny your reenlistment you appealed that denial to the Navy Personnel Command. 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. As denial of reenlistment requests are not considered administrative processing, the member would not have had the opportunity to elect an administrative board.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04859-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 2008. 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 | CY2008 | 02149-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2008. You were released from active duty on 17 March 2006, and discharged from the USMCR on 6 December 2006 at the expiration of your enlistment. 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 | CY2007 | 02275-07
02275-0727 May 2008This 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 8 May 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,...