Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10386-08
Original file (10386-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
This is in referen
naval record pursu
United States Code

A three-member pan

Records, sitting 1

application on 3 M
injustice were rev

regulations and pr
Board. Documentar
of your applicatio

support thereof, y

regulations and po
advisory opinion,
2008,

After careful and
record, the Board
insufficient to es

error or injustice.

concurred with the

Accordingly, your
votes of the membe
request.

Tt is regretted th
that favorable act
the Board reconsid

B

a copy of wh

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

RDZ:ecb
Docket No. 10386-08
5 March 2009

ce to your application for correction of your
ant to the provisions of title 10 of the
section 1552.

el of the Board for Correction of Naval

In executive session, considered your

arch 2009. Your allegations of error and
Zewed in accordance with administrative
locedures applicable to the proceedings of this
lY evidence considered by the Board consisted
In, together with all material submitted in

our naval record and applicable statutes,
licies. In addition, the Board considered the

from Headquarters, Marine Corps dated 6 August
inch is attached.

conscientious consideration of the entire
found that the evidence submitted was
tablish the existence of probable material

In this connection, the Board substantially
comments contained in the advisory opinion.

application has been denied. The names and
Irs of the panel will be furnished upon

at the circumstances of your case are such
hon cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
er 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 rbgularity 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,

 

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 09316-08

    Original file (09316-08.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. 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 | CY2009 | 00648-09

    Original file (00648-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    section 1552. , A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 4 May 2009 with attachments and 28 May 2009, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03650-09

    Original file (03650-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 July 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 opinion from the Navy Personnel Command dated 21 May 2009, a copy of which is attached...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02809-09

    Original file (02809-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ‘A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval -Records, sitting in‘executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 16 April 2009, a copy of which ig 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 | 00845-09

    Original file (00845-09.PDF) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 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 | 11167-08

    Original file (11167-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . 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 | 11767-08

    Original file (11767-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated | 28 January 2009 with reference (a), 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 | 06408-09

    Original file (06408-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2009. 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. Conseguently, 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 | 12171-08

    Original file (12171-08.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. 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.