Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00648-09
Original file (00648-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

HD: hd
Docket No. 00648-09
8 January 2010

 

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. ,

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 7 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 and applicable statutes, regulations and
policies. 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. The Board also considered your e-mail dated 1 July

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. In this connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion
dated 4 May 2009. Accordingly, your application has been
denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
furnished upon request.

Tt is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
the Board-xeconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
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,

wea, I

W. DEAN PFET
Executive Director

Enclosures

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03038-09

    Original file (03038-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    , A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 28 January 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, dated 20 May. 2009 with attachment and 19 August 2009, and the Navy Personnel Command dated 23 June 2009, copies of which are attached.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03387-09

    Original file (03387-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 January 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10683-09

    Original file (10683-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in Support thereof 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 | CY2009 | 12202-09

    Original file (12202-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You request promotion to lieutenant commander with an effective date of 24 July 2009. AR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. 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 | 11523-09

    Original file (11523-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 2 December 2009 and 30 March 2010 with attachments and the Memorandum for the Record dated 29 June 2010, 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 | CY2009 | 03330-09

    Original file (03330-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your “application on 28 January 2010. ‘In addition, ‘the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 6 May 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 | 04473-09

    Original file (04473-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01037-09

    Original file (01037-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2009 | 10956-09

    Original file (10956-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 09981-09

    Original file (09981-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ef your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof 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.