. .DERARTMENT-OF-THE-NAVY.
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BUG
Docket No: 4337-13
15 September 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.
You requested eight days of non-pay active duty credit.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application 10 September 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice..
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 4
February 1991. On 25 January 1993, you were released from
active duty with an honorable characterization of service due to
completion of your service obligation and transferred to the
Navy Reserve. You had one year, 11 months, and 22 days of
active duty service.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your allegation that
the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) has denied you benefits
based on you serving less than two years. However, the Board
concluded that your active duty term of service should not be
changed since you did not actuaily serve two years. The Board
particularly noted that you did not provide evidence from the
DVA that it has denied you benefits. In view of the above, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panel wiil be furnished upon request.
#It is regretted that’ the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable actiién cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
“the Board reconsider it& 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
wnaval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
‘existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4909 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5894 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 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. From 22 July 1969 through 16 September 1970, you were UA from your unit on five occasions totaling a period of 320 days.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7833 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2014. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and, on 19 April .1996, you received an OTH discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3686 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. On 20 June 1977 a panel of the Naval Discharge Review Board {NDRB}, convened under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP) and upgraded your undesirable discharge to general under honorable conditions. the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5678 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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. 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 | NR6681 13
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. Your case was forwarded recommending that you be discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct. 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 | CY2011 | 06860-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive seseion, considered your , application on i November 2011. However, neither the DVA nor the Department of Defense considers a general discharge issued by the SDRP to entitle you to any benefits denied by the original discharge. 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 | NR4022 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 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. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate reentry code based on your circumstances.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1879-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 January 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 | CY1999 | 05416-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 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...