Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2734-13
Original file (NR2734-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

TAL
Docket No: 2734-13
27 February 2014

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 5 February 2014. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient

.. to establish the existence. of probable Material error or
-injustice.

at

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
5 August 1975 at age 18. Based on the information currently
contained in your record it appears that you were enlisted in
error and processed for separation. In connection with this

processing, you would have acknowledged the separation action -
‘and the separation authority would have approved a

recommendation for separation. The record clearly shows that on

30 September 1975, you were discharged with an honorable

characterization. At that time you were assigned the separation

code of KFC and an RE- -3E reenlistment code, which means that you

were enlisted in’ error.

‘The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed

all potentially mitigating factors, such. as your overall record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors_
were not sufficient to warrant a change in the separation code
and reenlistment code. 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
& presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.

, Gonsequently, when applying for a correction of an official

—_— a

ROBERT D. MAN

Acting Executive Director.

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8357 13

    Original file (NR8357 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2014. However, on 12 March 1975, the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) upgraded your BCD to a general discharge for the convenience of the government. 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 | NR8150 13

    Original file (NR8150 13.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. You elected to consult with legal counsel and subsequently requested an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | NR4927 13

    Original file (NR4927 13.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 May 2014. 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. On 18 January 1980, you received the general discharge (unsuitability-personality disorder), and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5909 13

    Original file (NR5909 13.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 June 2014. 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 | CY2013 | NR2250-13

    Original file (NR2250-13.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 2014. 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. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of ‘unsuitability due to the diagnosed personality disorder.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6611 13

    Original file (NR6611 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2014. You elected to exercise your procedural right to have your case considered by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | CY2005 | 03286-05

    Original file (03286-05.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, advisory opinion, 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 17 December 1973 at age 17 with parental...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02717-11

    Original file (02717-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 2012. 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 requested to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2487-13

    Original file (NR2487-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2014. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR04500 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR04500 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. 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...