Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08695-06
Original file (08695-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                    2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

                                             TJR
                                             Docket No: 8695-06
                                                                                           27 February 2007

D ear Mr.

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 27 February 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 the advisory opinion furnished by the Headquarters, Marine Corps, Performance Evaluation Review Branch dated 19 September 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 injustice. In this regard, 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
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04572-10

    Original file (04572-10.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 February 2011. in this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion regarding the Cycle 2, 2006 PRT, and further observed that the earliest data currently appearing on PRIMS is for Cycle 1, 2007. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08638-06

    Original file (08638-06.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. 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. This is an advisory memorandum for the use by the Board for correction of Naval Records (BCNR) only.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07768-07

    Original file (07768-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5~OO JSRDocket No:7768-0727 March 2008This 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.You requested, in effect, that the package reflecting your relief for the good of the service from drill instructor duty, except the Commanding General approval letter dated 9 March 2006, be removed from your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08443-06

    Original file (08443-06.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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03970-07

    Original file (03970-07.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 NPC Memo 1000 BUPERS 325 dtd 23 Jan 08, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02144-09

    Original file (02144-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail 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 | CY2007 | 10587-07

    Original file (10587-07.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 NPC memorandum 1430 Ser 811/057 of 16 January 2008, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08169-07

    Original file (08169-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    08169-0727 January 2008This 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 25 January 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in Support thereof, your naval record and applicable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07403-08

    Original file (07403-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2009. 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 | CY2006 | 11289-06

    Original file (11289-06.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 CMC memorandum 1400/3 MMPR-2, 29 January 2007, 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...