Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01729-07
Original file (01729-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS -
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

CRS
Docket No: 1729-07

21 February 2008

 

 

This is in reference to your application for correction. of your
naval récord pursuant Eo Che provistTons SOF title TO 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 February 2008. 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 Headquarters Marine Corps dated 31 January

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. In this connection the Board substantially

concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
The Board noted, however, that although the advisory opinion
States that you were discharged by reason of minor disciplinary
infractions, the Naval Discharge Review Board changed the reason
for separation to a pattern of misconduct on 3 July 1995. That
change had no effect on your reentry code, because a code of RE-4
is required for each of those bases for separation. 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.

 

 

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05746-07

    Original file (05746-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Headquarters Marine Corps, a copy of which is attached.After...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00944-08

    Original file (00944-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2008. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 29 February 2008, 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 | 06704-07

    Original file (06704-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the 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 | CY2008 | 09797-08

    Original file (09797-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2009. 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 opinions furnished by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, dated 9 January 2008 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 | 06837-07

    Original file (06837-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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. ), 10 September 2007 with enclosure and 9 November 2007, copies of which are attached.

  • 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 | CY2007 | 09393-07

    Original file (09393-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2008. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 26 November 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 | 11270-07

    Original file (11270-07.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. The Board also considered your letter dated 18 February 2008.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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05851-07

    Original file (05851-07.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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, a copy of which Ls 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.