Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10080-06
Original file (10080-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                  2NAVYANNEX
        WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


HD : hd
Docket No. 01008-06
21 September 2006


Dear     __




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 21 September 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 navai record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 6 May 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 connection, 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
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 | CY2006 | 00472-06

    Original file (00472-06.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 (a) request comments and recommendations in subject’s case. Member is not entitled to active duty credit for her time spent at the USNA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02479-06

    Original file (02479-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval RECOTES g sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2006. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 27 April 2006, a copy of which is attached. 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 | CY2009 | 05864-09

    Original file (05864-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 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 or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01148-06

    Original file (01148-06.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 theapplicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.Sincerely,W. The member requests the report be submitted to him by another reporting senior.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11264-09

    Original file (11264-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 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 or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03487-07

    Original file (03487-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2008. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 21 August 2007, a copy of which is attached. 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 | CY2006 | 02341-06

    Original file (02341-06.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 September 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. 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 | CY2008 | 07246-08

    Original file (07246-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your request concerning your medal was not considered, as you may submit that request to the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) (PERS-312E). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. 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 | CY2009 | 00587-09

    Original file (00587-09.PDF) Auto-classification: Denied

    ™ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (PERS-~- 311) dated 26 February 2009, a copy of which is attached. 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 | CY2006 | 00806-06

    Original file (00806-06.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 the Navy Personnel Command dated 5 April 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...