Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02129-09
Original file (02129-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100 CRG

Docket No: 2129-09
4 November 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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ~ |
application on 4 November 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, requlations
and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 12 June
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.

The Board did net consider whether your characterization of
service or reason for separation should be changed, since you did
not ask for such consideration and you have not exhausted your
administrative remedies by applying to the Naval Discharge Review
Board (NDRB) by submitting the attached DD Form 293..

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,

Vga ten
‘ EAN PFE
Executive Dir

Enclosures

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11880-08

    Original file (11880-08.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 1 July 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 | 11978-08

    Original file (11978-08.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. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, 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 | 06687-08

    Original file (06687-08.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. You may reapply to this Board if the NDRB denies your request. 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 | 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 | 09198-08

    Original file (09198-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    09198-08 19 November 2009 FeS ee A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 November 2009. consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Censequently, 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 | 08531-09

    Original file (08531-09.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 | 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 | 07343-09

    Original file (07343-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 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 | CY2009 | 01833-09

    Original file (01833-09.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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12180-08

    Original file (12180-08.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. 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...