Docket No: 11612-19            
Ref: Signature Date 
 

Dear :  
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.     
     
Although your application was not filed in a 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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 2020.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of the Board.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 9 February 1972.  You served onboard the USS , which was recognized in February 1973, with the Battle Efficiency Award (white “E”).  On 8 May 1974, you were honorably discharged from the Navy.  Your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) reflects your entitlement to the National Defense Service Medal. 
 
In your application for correction, you ask that your record be updated to reflect the Battle Efficiency Ribbon, Navy “E” Ribbon.  You state that you have an award order for the ribbon, and provide a letter dated 21 April 1973, in which the Commanding Officer, USS  commended the ship on Commander Cruiser-Destroyer Force s recognition of outstanding performance by awarding the ship with the Battle Efficiency Award (white “E”).  You state that you have previously tried to update your record to reflect the award and do not understand why the military is stating that the award does not exist. 

As part of the review process, Navy Personnel Command issued an Advisory Opinion (AO) dated 3 September 2020.  The AO states that the Navy Battle Efficiency Award was established by SECNAV letter Ser 210 of 31 March 1976, with an effective date of 1 July 1974.  The AO noted that you were separated from military duty before the establishment of the award, and are therefore not entitled to the award.  The AO was provided to you, and you were given 30 days in which to submit a response.  When you did not provide a response within the 30-day timeframe, your case was submitted to the Board for consideration. 
 
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all factors, including your receipt of the letter of commendation dated 21 April 1973.  The Board found that based on the AO’s information regarding the effective date of the Navy Battle Efficiency Award, it appears that although the USS  may have been issued the “Battle Efficiency Award (white “E”), prior to July 1974, the Battle E Ribbon did not exist and was not authorized to be included in Block 28 of the DD Form 214.  The Board acknowledged the frustration that surrounds your request, but regrettably found that based on the effective date of 1 July 1974, you are not entitled to the Battle E Ribbon for the Navy Battle Efficiency Award. 
 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or 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,