DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
704 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1904
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JET
Docket No. NR3292-14
25 Nov 14
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC i552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 25 November 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. In addition, the Board considered the
advisory opinion furnished by CNPC memo 1780 PERS-312 of 12 Sep
14, a copy of which is attached.
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. In making this determination, the Board
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
The Board found that Block 3 of your DD Form 4
(Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United
States) and Block 4 of the DD Form 1966 (Record of Military
Processing) both reflect that your Home of Record (HOR) is
Manchester, CT. The Board agreed with the advisory opinion and
regulations that “Only if a break in service exceeding one full
day occurred may the member change the HOR.” The Board further
found that it was not the recruiter’s responsibility to know the
benefits of every state and inform potential recruits of those
benefits. .
EET OR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
“Pocket No. NR3292-14
Under these circumstances, the Board found that no relief is
warranted. 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 probable material
error or injustice.
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure: CNPC memo 1780 PERS-312 of 12 Sep 14
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3936 14
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 CNPC memo 1780 PERS-312 of 12 Sep 14, a copy of which is attached. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1081 14
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 CNPC Memo 1780 PERS-312 of 2 Apr 14, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5412 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, ‘sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all naterial -submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8534 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNPC Memo 1780 PERS-312 of ip @ 2 copy of which is attached.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR773 14
Members who are retired are not ¢€ the benefits. Because my retirement date followed 50 closely behind the 1 memo (2270un2002) , the memo was release of the Post 9/11 GI Bil not well known at my command and key points of the memo were not ement.” However, the Board disseminated to me before my retir formation about the Post-9/11 found that whether as you claim in GI Bill was not disseminated to you or the command before your retirement, information about the Post-9/1i GI Billi has...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR307 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 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. However, the screen shot of the Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) application you printed prior to submitting your application clearly shows two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5091 14
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNPC memo 1780 PERS-314/025 of 22 Sep 14, a copy of which is attached. This is an important feature of the law because the transferability Docket No. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2476 14
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 CNPC Memo 1780 PERS-314 o— 1 Jul 14, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden igs on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4914 14
In August 2011, NAVADMIN 235/11 changed this requirement and established a deadline for transfer of eligibility of August 1, 2013. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Beginning 1 August 2013, DoD Policy requires that all service members who wish to transfer their education benefits to a family member obligate for an additional four years of service regardless of their time in service or retirement date.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6830 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2014. The Board for Correction of Naval Records has also denied upgrading your discharge from General (Under Honorable Conditions) to Honorable. 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 .