Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06549-05
Original file (06549-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOP CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~5IQO

BJG
Docket No:6549-05
11 August 2006



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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2006. 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 opinions from the Marine Corps Recruiting Command, dated 10 January 2006, and the Marine Corps Officer Candidates School (OCS), dated 16 March 2006, copies of which are 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 this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion from OCS in concluding you have not demonstrated you were inequitably disenrolled from Officer Candidate Class 173. 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 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,







Enclosures

Copy to:
The Honorable
The Honorable

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12242-08

    Original file (12242-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 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 | CY2001 | 07244-01

    Original file (07244-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2003. 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, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS MARINE CORPS RECRUITING COMMAND 3280 RUSSELL ROAD QUANTICO, VA 22134-5103 IN REPLY REFER...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08924-09

    Original file (08924-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant reinstatement in the Navy as a commissioned officer, because of your disciplinary record from the DRB and your lack of accepting responsibility for your actions. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07013-07

    Original file (07013-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, the Board considered the letter furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) dated 4 October 2006, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08445-10

    Original file (08445-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. However, the Board concluded that you were correctly assigned the RE-3K reentry code due to your request to be disenrolled from OCS.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12862-09

    Original file (12862-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 this regard, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. 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 | CY2008 | 06263-08

    Original file (06263-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 an advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, a copy of which is enclosed. 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 | CY2001 | 01819-01

    Original file (01819-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 May 2001. 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. Corpora entitle August 2000. adviscry opinion on Lance request for BAH-DIFF 21 Oc-sober 1998 through 1 Per reference (b) Lance Corpora 2 .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4874 13

    Original file (NR4874 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 2013. 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 | CY2001 | 04663-01

    Original file (04663-01.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosures DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG Docket No: 4663-01 2 April 2003 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 0 ~mIuu-.m”~ Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. In response to congressional interest in Petitioner’s case, Headquarters Marine Corps stated, in part, as follows: ... On September 22, 1999, (Petitioner)...