Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00396-09
Original file (00396-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RESORT

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No: 396-09

30 April 2009

 

 

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 21 April 2009. 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 on 12 May 2003 at age 19. On 3
September 2004, your brother was killed in action in Iraq.
Subsequently, you requested release from active duty because you
were the sole surviving member of your family. This request was
granted and you were released from active duty on 20 December

2004. The narrative reason for your separation was "surviving
family member" with a separation code of MCQl.

You desire a change in the separation code because it is
preventing you from enlisting in the National Guard apparently
because the regulations prevent the enlistment of individuals in
your situation. It is clear from documents in your file that you
could have remained on active duty but elected to be released.
Further, the Board noted that even if the separation code and
narrative reason were changed, that you would still be a
surviving family member and this information would either be
available or should be disclosed to recruiters.

The Board concluded that the narrative season and separation code
were properly assigned and no change is warvanted.

Accordingly, your application has been denied. The nemes 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,

Nahe

W. DEAN
Tecutive. r

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11054-08

    Original file (11054-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on $ June 2009. After review, the separation authority directed an honorable discharge due te parenthood or custody of minor children: and the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment .code.-.You--« were so discharged on 13 September 2006. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08060-08

    Original file (08060-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 2009. It further appears that you were administratively processed for separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change to your narrative reason for separation because of the seriousness of your drug related misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 02990-04

    Original file (02990-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After your discharge, you were rated as 10% disabled by the Department of Veterans Affairs.In your application you are requesting that the SPD code be changed to “JDG”, which will indicate that you were discharged by reason of parenthood or custody of minor children and your discharge was involuntary. Further, there is no evidence that a discharge by reason of physical disability was warranted. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02070-08

    Original file (02070-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 2009. 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 a change of your reenlistment code because of the severity of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 04637-05

    Original file (04637-05.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 31 July 2001 at age 20. Given the comments and recommendation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05774-03

    Original file (05774-03.pdf) 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. The Board did not consider whether the characterization of service or reason for separation should be changed since you did not request such action and you have not exhausted your administrative remedies by applying to the Naval Discharge and Review Board (NDRB). Consequently, when applying...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02642-09

    Original file (02642-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2009. 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 Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the narrative reason for separation because you have not exhausted your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06929-09

    Original file (06929-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Z A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 July 2009. 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 noted that, serving as an officer in the Marine Corps, you were not assigned a reenlistment code, and therefore, your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11312-06

    Original file (11312-06.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 Navy on 1 October 2003 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident.During...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1501015

    Original file (ND1501015.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s narrative reason for separation should be changed to Erroneous Entry; however, the characterization of service should remain as Uncharacterized due to the Applicant’s active service in the Navy was less than 180 days. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain...