Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07177-05
Original file (07177-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                    BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                2 NAVY ANNEX
                    WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

            LCC
            Docket No. 7177-05
            18 Oct 05







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 18 October 2005. 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 opinion furnished by NPC
letter, 1000 PERS-312D1/06, 4 October 2005, 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 injustice. The Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. 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,




      W.    DEAN PFEIFFER
Enclosure   Executive Director












                           DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                           NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
                            5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
                          MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000

                                                        1000
                                                        PERS-3 12D1/06

                                           Oct 4 2005

From: Commander, Navy Personnel Command
To:   Executive Director, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Via:  Assistant, Board for Correction of Naval Records (PERS-3LC2)

Subj:

Ref:  (a) BCNR Docket Number 7177-05

1.    It is our opinion that reference (a) be disapproved. The member~ s
service record does not support the fact that New York was the home of
record at the time he enlisted in the U. S. Navy on 12 January 2004, nor
when he reported for active duty on 3 November 2004. His record shows he
lived in Virginia from September 2001 until he reported to active duty.




                                By direction

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06849-06

    Original file (06849-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    6849-06 25 Oct 06This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 usc 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2006. 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. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03687-06

    Original file (03687-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    3687-0625 Oct 06This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2006. 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. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05150-08

    Original file (05150-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 2008. 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 | CY2005 | 01000-05

    Original file (01000-05.rtf) 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 the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1160 Ser 4811/079 of 2 Feb 06, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06303-05

    Original file (06303-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. In response to your request, I have reviewed the, case ofHe has petitioned for a correction to his record. The exact reasons for the delay in the US Senate Confirmation process are unclear and outside my expertise — yet the fact remains that when he accepted his augmentation in August 2004, he started...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04750-07

    Original file (04750-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    04750-07 9 June 2008Dear This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2008. 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. This is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05392-06

    Original file (05392-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Reference (c) provided a zone “A” SRB for NEC 8483 at the time the petitioner received orders to NEC 8483 training. This is an advisory memorandum to reference (a) for the use by the Board for correction of Naval Records (BCNR) only.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 04472-05

    Original file (04472-05.rtf) 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 the advisory opinion furnished by NPc memorandum 1430 481lE9/525, 17 August 2006, a copy of each is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06856-05

    Original file (06856-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 2005. 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 | CY2013 | NR2812-13

    Original file (NR2812-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 October 2013. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNPC Memo 1000 PERS-312/06 dtd 13 Jun 13, 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 injustice.