Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10719-06
Original file (10719-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

HD:hd
Docket No. 10719-06

3 August 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 2 August
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 Of ficeof theChief of Naval Operations
dated 5 March 2007 with enclosures, 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, notwithstanding your command’s
support for your request. The Board was unable to determine, from
the documentation you provided, when you became pregnant. In view
of the above, 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. Inthis regard,
it is important tokeep inmind that apresumption of regularity attaches
toall official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction
ofanofficial naval record, theburdenisontheapplicant todemonstrate
the existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

 

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11224-06

    Original file (11224-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You also impliedly requested that the discharge be set aside and that you be reinstated. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 2007. 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 | CY2007 | 00332-07

    Original file (00332-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 August 2007. 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, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient toestablish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08397-06

    Original file (08397-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 2007. 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, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03871-10

    Original file (03871-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August 2010. in addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 21 May 2010, 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 | CY2007 | 00292-07

    Original file (00292-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that your lieutenant commander date of rank and effective date be adjusted to reflect selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 06 Aerospace Engineering Duty Officer Lieutenant Commander Selection Board, vice FY 07.A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 August 2007. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 14 February 2007 with...

  • 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 | CY2007 | 04666-07

    Original file (04666-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 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 | CY2010 | 06527-10

    Original file (06527-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2011. 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 | CY2008 | 09300-08

    Original file (09300-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Your application asserts, essentially, that you were compelled to elect a 1 June 2007 retirement date vice al August 2007 retirement date due to a hostile environment at your command. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to _ demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09105-08

    Original file (09105-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the decision of the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB) dated 6 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. 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.