DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 06267-09
26 March 2010
This is in reference to your request for further consideration
of your application for correction of your naval record pursuant
to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section
1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 25 March 2010. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the preceedings 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 you failed to submit any new
Material evidence or other matter in support of your request.
probable material error or injustice. Accordingly, the Board
affirmed it previous decision in your case, dated 11 December
1986, and denied your ‘application. The names and votes of the
members of the panel wili be furnished upon request.
It igs 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 or other matter not previously 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,
Leak
W. DEAN PFRI
Executive RA tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06317-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 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 | CY2009 | 11755-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 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 | CY2010 | 09466-10
You requested that the fitness report for 1 January to 14 August 2009 be modified, in accordance with the letters from the reporting senior (RS) dated 23 March 2010 and the reviewing officer (RO) dated 29 March 2010, to reflect that you were recommended for “accelerated promotion.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09992-09
7 ae A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof 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 material error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04734-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 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 | CY2010 | 05610-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 2011. 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 | CY2011 | 02505-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 2011. In an effort to ascertain whether you would have advanced or not from the September 2010 cycle (if you had taken the MME exam), the raw exam score that you achieved on the March 2011 MME exam was applied to the remainder of your profile For the September 2010 cycle. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02436-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS . A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 2010. 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 | 02948-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 March 2010. 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. 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 | CY2009 | 13116-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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...