Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12246-08
Original file (12246-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

LCC
Docket No. 12246-08
16 Mar O09

 

Dear ie

This is in reference to your application for correction of your 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 application on

16 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 NPC memorandum 1430 Ser
NO1E/064 of 2 February 2009, 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. 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 also 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,

   

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10087-08

    Original file (10087-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 24 November 2008 with attachments (your fitness reports for 17 August 2007 to 29 February 2008 and 1 April to 16 May 2008), a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00642-09

    Original file (00642-09.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 | 09799-08

    Original file (09799-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 09789-08

    Original file (09789-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 22 November 2008, a copy of which is attached, and the Board's files on your previous cases, docket numbers 07434-04 and 01741-06. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05401-08

    Original file (05401-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 2009. Documentary evidence 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 | 09800-08

    Original file (09800-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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 | 11829-08

    Original file (11829-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your co application on 16 September 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. 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 | 00350-09

    Original file (00350-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 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 navai record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...