Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01753-08
Original file (01753-08.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. 01753-08

30 June 2008

 

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. You requested that your
failures of selection by the Fiscal Year 07 and 08 Line
Lieutenant Commander Selection Boards be removed, and that you
be reinstated to active duty in the grade of lieutenant

commander, if you have been promoted to that grade in the Navy
Reserve, with a designator of 1630.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 26 June 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 the Navy Personnel Command dated
17 April 2008, a copy of which is attached. The Board also
considered your letter dated 3 June 2008 with enclosures.

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 above, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon

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.

Sincerely,

W. wn P¥ E
Cc

Executive Di

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03760-08

    Original file (03760-08.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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 20 May 2008, a copy of which is attached. Sincerely, Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND 5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000 5420 PERS-80 20 May 2008 MEMORANDUM...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03870-08

    Original file (03870-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board noted that your fitness report record made no mention of the matters cited in the record of counseling dated 18 July 2002. Since the Board found no defect in your fitness report record, and it could not find that members of the FY 04 Active Duty Staff Lieutenant Commander Selection Board were aware of the charges that were brought against you and then dismissed, it had no grounds to grant any of the relief requested. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11456-08

    Original file (11456-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. application on 7 May 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10951-07

    Original file (10951-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You also impliedly requested setting aside your discharge from the Navy Reserve on 1 February 2008 by reason of your having had at least two failures of selection to lieutenant commander.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 March 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05149-08

    Original file (05149-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 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. 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 | 02806-08

    Original file (02806-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11016-08

    Original file (11016-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with alli material submitted in support thereof, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 11 December 2008 with enclosures and 24 December 2008, copies of - which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12430-09

    Original file (12430-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 28 January 2010 with enclosures, a copy of which is attached, and your letter dated 19 May 2010 with enclosures. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03835-08

    Original file (03835-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 5 and 30 June and 29 July 2008, copies of which are 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.