DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TLG
Docket No: 6989-14
14 May 2015
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.
Although your application was not filed ina timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute
of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
8 May 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 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
23 November 1983. On 7 December 1987, you were counseled for
unsatisfactory performance for failure to adapt, refusal to
continue training, minor discipline infractions, and lack of
reasonable effort. Further, you stated to your superiors your
desire to go home and that you would continue to refuse
training. You also stated that you did not think you could take
training mentally.
As a result, you were recommended for an uncharacterized entry
level separation by reason of entry level performance/conduct.
On 21 December 1987, you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
The Board, in its ¥éview of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to change your RE-4 reenlistment code.
Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant changing your reentry code given your
unsatisfactory performance, refusal to continue training, lack
of effort, and minor discipline infractions. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
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 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
applying for correction of an official naval record, the burden
is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of the probable
material error or injustice.
Sincerel
ROBERT . O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01071
In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. SNR never actually told me that he refuses training, but then stated he did not think he could take it mentally, counseled SNR that boot camp was meant to be tough and that there was no reason he could not do well, when I told SNR to return to his company, he asked to speak with a chaplain. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5900 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 May 2015. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04906-07
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1085 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2015. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002672
The applicant states he was unaware the characterization of his service as entry level status on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with a separation date of 21 September 1987 is not considered for civil service retirement. The commander stated she was recommending he be discharged under the provisions of chapter 11 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel Separations) due to his unwillingness to adapt himself to the military environment (bear arms...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03601-07
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.You enlisted in the Navy on 13 July 2005 at age 18. In this regard, the discharge authority directed...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00415-07
A three-member panel’ of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2007. 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. On 20 April 1987 you were counseled regarding your continued failure to be at your appointed place of duty on time, and warned that failure to take...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06383-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 May 2009. 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 | CY2002 | 00648-01
LTCOL E submitted a report of his investigation on 30 May 1986 and concluded that although MAJ S was disliked by many members of LTCOL E further found that HMM-364, he was a competent officer. On 17 December 1986, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) action was initiated against you for the following specifications of LTCOLs E and R, no disciplinary Documentation in the record indicates that on 1 He recommended charges be disrespect to a superior officer 3 disrespect, disobedience and dereliction...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110016864
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 7 July 1987, his commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, for unsatisfactory Performance, and informed him of his rights. There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.