Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12062 14
Original file (NR12062 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

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

 

DIC
Docket No. NR12062-14
28 Apr 15

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval
record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.

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

27 April 2015. 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. A
review of Naval records indicates that the relief you requested is not
required and/or needed. You entered active service on 26 July 1982,
and retired on 31 August 2002. Your second DD Form 214 (Certificate
of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) listed the following
information: Block 12c (Net Active Service This Period) reads 16
years, 1 month, and 8 days. Block l2d (Total Prior Active Service)
reads 3 years, 11 months, 27 days. This comes to a grand total of 20
years, 0 months, 5 days. 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 evidence within one
year from the date of the Board's decision. New evidence is evidence
not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in
this case. 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
Docket No. NR12062-14

probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12810 14

    Original file (NR12810 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 27 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. NR12810-14 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 | CY2007 | 09623-07

    Original file (09623-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 2008. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6647 14

    Original file (NR6647 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 27 May 2015. On 27 September 1972, you made a written request for discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the forgoing period of UA totaling 241 days. 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 | 00772-10

    Original file (00772-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11914 14

    Original file (NR11914 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 27 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. 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 | CY2014 | NR2360 14

    Original file (NR2360 14.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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06734-05

    Original file (06734-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After review, the discharge authority directed the type of discharge warranted by your service record.Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and overall trait averages, which are computed from marks assigned during periodic evaluations. (Also, Service Number if applicable) ICORRECTED TO READ SEPARATION DATE ON DD FORM 214 BEING CORRECTED - 10 MAY 73 Ilc. NONE****** ********************************* ** ***** ************** ************ This DD form 215 cancels and supersedes DD...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00212-02

    Original file (00212-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A'three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 November 2002. 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 policies. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02796-01

    Original file (02796-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 January 2002. 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. sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to such as your youth and immaturity the fact that your unauthorized absences months. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10079 14

    Original file (NR10079 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that the evaluation and counseling record for 26 September 2011 to 27 January 2012 be modified by removing, from block 41 ("Comments on Performance”), “Member received counseling for unduly familiar relationship with subordinate and appears to have corrected behavior accordingly.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considerec your application on 16 March 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by...