DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX HD: hd
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No. 07751-08
26 March 2009
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, in effect,
advancement to ABE1 (pay grade E-6).
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 26 March 2009. 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
3 September 2008, 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 found the result of your administrative separation
board did not invalidate the basis for the withdrawal of your
recommendation for advancement. 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. 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,
Ns
W. DEAN P
Executive \DiteBtor
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03574-09
Finally, you impliedly requested removing the service record page 13 ("Administrative Remarks") entry dated 25 July 2008 and documentation of your removal from the Fiscal Year (FY) 09 Active Duty Chief Petty Officer Selection Board List.. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 2009, Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01037-09
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory | opinions furnished by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and the Navy Personnel Command dated 28 May 2009 with enclosure and 23 June 2009, respectively, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07813-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 3 and 22 September 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01506-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 27 March 2009, 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 | CY2008 | 08020-08
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 15 September 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02584-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 October 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 22 and 23 March 2011, 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00587-09
™ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (PERS-~- 311) dated 26 February 2009, 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 | CY2009 | 10956-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 17 November and 11 December 2009 and 11 January 2010, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04366-09
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof 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 17 June 2009 with enclosure and the Navy Personnel Command dated 26 June 2009, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR413 13
You requested that your discharge of 10 August 2009 be voided; that you be awarded constructive service credit from 11 August 2009 to the date you would have attained 20 years of active duty service; ‘that all *red flag” actions be removed; that you be considered by a special selection board (SSB) for advancement to pay grade E-7; and that all records reflecting the substantiation of the sexual assault allegation against you be removed. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion...