Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03010-09
Original file (03010-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

HD:ha
Docket No. 03010-09
28 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 28 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
ef your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof and applicable statutes, regulations and
policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished. by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations
dated 18 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.
The Board found that although your "special" performance
evaluation report for 16 March to 20 April 2006, submitted by
the executive officer, indicates you were within physical
readiness standards, it does not establish that the commanding
officer authorized a waiver from body composition standards. In
view of the above, your application has been denied. The names
and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
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,

Woe

W. DEAN P
Executive or

 

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03374-10

    Original file (03374-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 2010. 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 warranting removal of your failure of selection by the FY 2010 Captain Selection Board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02834-09

    Original file (02834-09.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 Office of the Chief of Naval Operations — dated 19 May 2009 with attachment, 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 | 03613-09

    Original file (03613-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Navy Operations and the Navy Personnel Command dated 18 June and 9 July 2009, respectively, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06958-09

    Original file (06958-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and | injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board also considered your letter dated 30 December 2009 with enclosures. 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 | 03233-09

    Original file (03233-09.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 | CY2010 | 05730-10

    Original file (05730-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1 January to 1 May 2006 and modifying the report for 28 April to 31 December 2006 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s *Directed and Additional Comments”), reference to your removal from the Body Composition Program (BCP). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 July 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted...

  • 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 | 11112-09

    Original file (11112-09.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° July 2010. 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 | CY2010 | 10996-10

    Original file (10996-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the NPC dated 26 and 28 October 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 injustice.

  • 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...