DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 TIR
Docket No: 6139-14
5 February 2015
This is in reference to your latest reconsideration request dated
17 April 2014. You previously petitioned the Board and were
advised in our letter that your application had been denied.
Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-
member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session on 4 February 2015. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your
application and any material submitted in support of your
application.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board determined that your assertions of being
coerced into enlisting in the Navy even though you had failed the
entry examination and were mentally retarded, even though not
previously considered by the Board, were insufficient to
establish the existence of material error or injustice. The
Board determined that your allegations were not enough to
outweigh the significant misconduct you committed while serving
on active duty. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
It is regrettable 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 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 your 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 record, the burden is on
the applicant to demonstrate the existence of material error or
injustice,
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAO, SUITE tool
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
HD
Docket No. NR7765-14
3 February 2015
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy
subj: TE sc, .0x- fi
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
Ref: (a) 10 U.8.6, 1552
Encl: (1) DD Form 149 dtd 6 Jun 14 w/attachments
(2) HOMC MIQ memo dtd 15 Jan 15
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject,
hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this
Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be
corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative
Remarks (1070)"”) entry dated 31 July 2013. A copy of the contested
entry is at Tab A.
2. The Board, consisting of Mses. Countryman and McCain and Mr.
Relyea, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on
29 January 2015, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that
the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by
the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable
statutes, regulations and policies.
3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows:
a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations
within the Department of the Navy.
b. In correspondence at enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine
Corps office with cognizance over the subject matter of Petitioner's
case has commented to the effect that the request has merit and
warrants favorable action.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and
especially in light of enclosure (2), the Board finds the existence
of an error warranting the following corrective action:
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing the
service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”)} entry dated
31 July 2013. This is to be accomplished by physically removing the
page 11 on which the entry appears, or completely obliterating the
entry so it cannot be read, rather than merely lining through it.
b. That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating
to the Board's recommendation be corrected, removed or completely
expunged from Petitioner's record and that no such entries or
material be added to the record in the future.
4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the Board
for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations,
Section 723.6(c)) it is certified that a quorum was present at the
Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true
and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled
matter.
DOW L. fa2pterr
JONATHAN S. RUSKIN
Recorder
5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e)
of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records
(32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723. 6(e)) and having assured
compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the
foregoing corrective action taken under the authority of reference
(a) has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the
Navy.
be
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5737 14
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 HD Docket No. NR5737-14 29 January 2015 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy subj: EE osc, oo a REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (ay 16 0.8
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8392 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (‘Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 16 May 2014. The Board, having reviewed al ry and injustice, finds as follows: to Petitioner's allegations of erro a, Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8961 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) entries dated 11 March 2009 and 11 August 2011. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of enclosures (2) and (3), the Board finds the existence of an error and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8698 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 3 January 2014. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of enclosure (2), the Board finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting the following...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11866 14
c. The page 11 entry at issue counsels Petitioner for “Violation of the UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice] Article 92 by involving yourself in an inappropriate relationship with the spouse of another service member.” d. Enclosure (3) shows that the PERB basis for removing the contested fitness report included a finding that the page 11 entry in question, which was cited in the fitness report, “was not substantiated.” e. In the advisory opinion at enclosure (4), the HOMC office with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11222 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing three undated service record page il (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entries stating Petitioner is eligible but not recommended for promotion to sergeant for June, July and August (no year given) “because of Physical Fitness shortcoming” (copies at Tab A). The Board, consisting of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5328 14
1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 dtd 21 Mar 14 w/attachments (2) HOMC MIO memos dtd 3 Nov 14 and 6 Jan 15 (3) Subject's naval record i. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)"”) entry dated 29 March 2010 {copy at Tab A). over your max wt) .” CONCLUSION: Upon review and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7373 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”") entry dated 21 June 2012 (copy at Tab A). 2, The Board, consisting cf =} iis MMMM, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 29 January 2015, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10930 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by revoking his reenlistment code of RE-30 (refused oraers assigned without sufficient obligated service remaining) . f. In enclosure (4), Petitioner contends that his having been assigned the RE-1A reenlistment code justifies removing the contested entry concerning the RE-30 code. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6355 14
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 1. The Board, consisting of Messrs. ee reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 19 February 2015, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 6 April 2006.