DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC! 20370-5100
MEH
Docket No. 1261-08
24 Nov 08
Dear oN an
This is in reference to your client, Former Midshipman (qa
application for correction of his naval record pursuant to the
provisions of 10 USC 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for|Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your clients’ application on
24 November 2008. Your client’s 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 his application,
together with all material submitted in support thereof, his naval
record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In
addition, the Board considered the adyisory opinions furnished by
NAVCAD memo 5800 of 23 Apr 08, and OJAG memo 5420.1a Ser
13/4BC12750.08 of 6 Jun 08, copies of |which are attached.
The Board member’s also considered your client’s request for a
personal appearance, however they found that the issues in the case
were adequately documented and that a|personal appearance with or
without counsel would not materially gaa to the Board’s understanding
of the issues involved. Thus, your client’s request for a personal
appearance has been denied.
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 opinions. The Board found there was no
error or injustice in the procedures Hex or the evidence considered
in your client’s disenrollment from the Naval Academy. Further, the
Board found that the education received, at government expense,
enhanced his opportunity for increased life-long earnings and
employment potential. It was noted that Mr. William A. Navas,
Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs), acting
on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy, approved the recoupment of the
cost of your client’s United States Naval Academy education on 7
February 2005. In response to your request for reconsideration, Mr.
Navas reaffirmed his previous deiciisaonm in a letter dated 15 November
2007.
Docket No. 1261-08
The Board found no compelling reason |to disturb Mr. Navas’s prior
decisions. Accordingly, your client's 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 client’s case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. Your client is 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 tol 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,
LD Moa
W. DEAN
Executive Di
Enclosures
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06277-07
6277-07 17 Dec 07This is in reference to your client’sapplication for correction of naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your client’s application on 17 December 2007. In addition, the Board considered the advisory Opinion furnished by NPC memo 1920 SER 834/026 of 28 Aug 07, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05474-08
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 MEH Docket No. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 2008. 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 | 05607-08
DEPARTMENT BOARD FOR CORRECTION 2 NAVY A WASHINGTON DC This is in reference the applicati mMaval record pursuant to the provi | | IA three-member panel of the Board Records, sitting in executive/ sess application on 24 November 2008. injustice were reviewed in ac¢orda regulations and procedures applica Board. Documentary material ¢onsi regulations and policies. your ¥ 1 t After careful and conscientious c record, the Board found that the insufficient to establish the exi error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03176-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 2009. The Board finds that, in light of the educational benefit you received, the regulations implementing the NROTC program and the terms of the scholarship agreement, it is mot an error or an injustice for the Secretary of the Navy to require reimbursement of the costs expended by the United States for your education. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01469-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your client’s application on 8 September 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your client’s application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your client’s naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Thus, your client’s request for a personal appearance has been denied.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02805-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, _. sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 2010. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00354-10
The Board found there was no injustice in the decision to disenroll you from the Naval Academy and there was no error or injustice in the decision to require full reimbursement for the educational costs expended on your behalf. The Board found that the regulations governing your attendance at the Naval Academy provide that a Midshipman who fails to complete the program requirements shall, at the discretion of the Secretary of the Navy, either serve on active duty for a specified period or...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01601-07
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 NSTC memo 1533 0D4 of 20 Dec 07 and NPC memo 1920 Ser 834/012 of 21 Feb 08, copies of which are attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10772-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your client’s application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your client’s naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board also considered your response to the NAV MED MPT&E memorandum dated 10 October 0,7.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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09247-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 2009. The Board finds that, in light of the educational benefit you received, the regulations implementing the NROTC program and the terms of the scholarship agreement, it is not an error or an injustice for the Secretary of the Navy to require reimbursement Docket No. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...