Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01382-07
Original file (01382-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


BAN
Docket No. 01382-07
18 March 2008



Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.

You have applied for a correction to your record for an error that allegedly occurred in 1969. Under the rules governing this Board, an application for a correction of a naval record must be made within three years after the discovery of the alleged error. Failure to file within the prescribed three years may be excused in cases where the Board finds that it is in the interests of justice to do so. In your case, you neglected to assert your claim for an inordinately long period of time without justification. You have provided no compelling evidence as to why you did not seek to have the alleged error corrected earlier. Accordingly, the Board found that it is not in the interests of justice to excuse the three year time limit in your particular case.

Even though the Board determined that it is not in the interest of justice to excuse the three-year time limitation, on March 17, 2008, a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session nevertheless considered the substantive allegations contained in your application. 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 memo 1430 Ser 811/211 of 29 Feb 08, 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 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 on both procedural and substantive grounds. 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 also 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      

        




































2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08732-07

    Original file (08732-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Under the rules governing this Board, an application for a correction of a naval record must be made within three years after the discovery of the alleged error. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1430 Ser 811/206 of 28 Feb 08, 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 the existence of probable material error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07120-09

    Original file (07120-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    after careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found there was no error or injustice in your discharge from the Naval Reserve in 1955 when you entered the Naval Academy. While at the Naval Academy, you were simply not training as a member of the Naval Reserve and not available to be called upon to meet emergencies as a member of the Naval Reserve. In the Board's view, any errors made by prior panels in decisions issued many years ago should not be perpetuated...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00957-07

    Original file (00957-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 8 March 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. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive DirectorEnclosureDEPARTMENTOF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3000 MARINE CORPS PENTAGONWASHINGTON, DC 20350-3000 N...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10794-07

    Original file (10794-07.pdf) 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. You requested we provide an advisory opinion on sis ee reer (hereinafter “Applicant”) removal of a page 11 entry to his service record book (SRB) dated 12 July 1999. On 12 July 1999, Applicant received a page 11 entry stating that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Sergeant.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10679-07

    Original file (10679-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. You requested an advisory opinion (hereinafter “Applicant”) application, docket #10679-07, which requested invalidation of a non-judicial punishment (NJP) and restoration of his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00428-08

    Original file (00428-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08273-07

    Original file (08273-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 2008. The Board noted that even if you had been unfit for duty, you would not have been entitled to disability separation or retirement, because your discharge by reason of misconduct would have taken precedence over disability evaluation processing. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03031-11

    Original file (03031-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, congidered your application on 24 October 2011. Under the rules governing this Board, an application for a correction of a naval record must be made within three years after the discovery of the alleged error. 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 | CY2008 | 00002-08

    Original file (00002-08.pdf) 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. In accordance with the reference, an application for correction of a record must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice unless the Board excuses the untimely filing in the interest of justice. No corrective action is warranted in this case because Applicant fails to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10721-08

    Original file (10721-08.pdf) 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. The Board did not consider whether your characterization of service or reason for separation should be changed, since you have not exhausted your administrative remedies by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...