Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02901-06
Original file (02901-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

         DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
 BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~51OO       

        
                  TRG
 Docket No: 2901-06
4 May 2007


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 6 March 2007. 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 an advisory opinion and the letter to you, both from Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 17 April and 18 July 2006, copies of which are enclosed.
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 and the letter from Headquarters Marine Corps.
In reaching its decision, the Board believed that a key factor missing in your case is any evidence that you applied for reenlistment through a prior service recruiter and that the request for reenlistment was officially denied by Headquarters Marine Corps. If reenlistment is denied, you should also explain why an enlistment in the Army Reserve or the National Guard is not a viable alternative.
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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05178-06

    Original file (05178-06.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 letter furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) dated 25 September 2003, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06155-06

    Original file (06155-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    06155-06 11 May 2007This 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 May 2007. In addition, it considered an advisory opinion provided by officials of Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps, dated 14 July 2006, a copy of which is attached.After careful and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04541-07

    Original file (04541-07.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 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02600-07

    Original file (02600-07.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 the Headquarters, Marine Corps, Performance Evaluation Review Branch dated 1 March 2007, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06851-06

    Original file (06851-06.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 Headquarters Marine Corps dated 27 July 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00587-07

    Original file (00587-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 CRSDocket No: 587-0720 March 2007This 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 28 February 2007. The Board also considered the advisory opinion from Headquarters...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02791-07

    Original file (02791-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Commandant of the Marine Corps dated 11 June 2007, 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. 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 | CY2006 | 07806-06

    Original file (07806-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SMWDocket No: 7806-06 11 January 2007This 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 January 2007. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08064-06

    Original file (08064-06.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 Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 31 August 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07051-06

    Original file (07051-06.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 Headquarters Marine Corps dated 15 June 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...