Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0916 14
Original file (NR0916 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

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

 

BC
Docket No: 00916-14
25 July 2014

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10, 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 July 2013. 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 applicabie 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 and began a period of active duty on 25.
September 2001. On 4 December 2007, you were informed by your
chain of command that you: could not comply with the Navy Family
Care requirements. On 25 February 2008, you submitted a request
for an early release. On 26 February. 2008, you were informed of
your rights in connection with administrative separation
processing which had been initiated in your case. On 7 March
2008, your commanding officer forwarded his recommendation that
you be separated with an honorable discharge by reason of
parenthood or custody of minor children. On 25 March 2008, the
Gischarge authority directed an honorable characterization of
service by reason of parenthood or custody of minor children.
You were so discharged on 9 April 2008 and assigned an RE-3B
(parenthood/pregnancy/childbirth) reentry code.
You have not demonstrated that your reentry code was assigned in
error, so the Board was unable to recommend favorable action on
your request. 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,

Te LS nn

ROBERT D. -ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08217-98

    Original file (08217-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction Of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your Your allegations of error and application on 4 May 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05509-02

    Original file (05509-02.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 2003. 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 | NR1174 14

    Original file (NR1174 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2015. 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...

  • 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 | CY1999 | 06881-98

    Original file (06881-98.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. of pending administrative separation action by reason of convenience of the government due to parenthood. 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 | CY2010 | 07785-10

    Original file (07785-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 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. ysalso considered your assertion that you honorably served for Sarly 18 years and the only reason you were not receiving a full ension was due to...

  • 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 | CY2005 | 05566-05

    Original file (05566-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500491

    Original file (ND0500491.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “Enlisted under a five year enlistment, with an honorable discharged and reenlisted and received general under honorable. 020730: CNPC directed the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the Government due to parenthood or custody of minor children.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00475

    Original file (ND04-00475.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00475 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040128. 001122: Commanding Officer recommended discharge with an honorable by reason of commission of a serious offense and convenience of the Government due to parenthood or custody of minor children. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).Issue 1: The Applicant...