DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
: 2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No. 01214-10
1 November 2010
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 28
October 2010. 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 served on active duty in the Navy from 15 April 1985 to 10 April
1986, when you were voluntarily discharged by reason of pregnancy.
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you should have
been discharged by reason of hardship vice pregnancy, the Board was
unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. 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,
iy “8
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06757-09
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. Additionally, the Board believed your reason for separation, “pregnancy”, is more favorable than the “hardship” discharge you are currently seeking. Consequentiy, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04373-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 2011. You served on active duty in the Navy from 29 December 1986 to 1 March 1988, when you were discharged by reason of pregnancy. 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 | CY2001 | 00931-01
your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. honorable discharge from the Marine Corps Reserve and were recommended for reenlistment. The Board thus concluded that there is no error or injustice in Accordingly, your application has been your reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01949-01
On 16 October 1995 you were honorably released from active duty, transferred to the Naval Reserve, and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. You did not provide the second page You were not An RE-3B means the individual was discharged for Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-3B or RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals separated by reason of pregnancy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01609-98
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 the Navy Personnel Command dated 31 December 1998, a copy of which is enclosed. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03266-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 1999. 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 | CY2014 | NR0916 14
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 §. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 2013. 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 | NR4422 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval _ Records, sitting in executive session,. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. At the time of your service, a conduct average of 3.00 was required for a fully honorable characterization of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09832-07
The portion of the MGIB agreement as it applies to your application states that you had to serve on active duty for a period of 36 months in order to be eligible and the benefit had to be used within 10 years. Since you do not meet the time in service requirement and your separation was clearly voluntary, the Board concluded that you are not entitled to MGIB benefits and a correction to your record is not warranted. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 02355-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 2013. 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...