DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DOC 20370-5100 .
HD :hd
Docket No. 03297-0939
13 August 2009
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant tc the provisions of title 10 of the
United States Code, section 1552. You requested that your
Minimum Service Requirement date be changed from June 2016 to
August 2011.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
' Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 13 August 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, applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished
by the Navy Personnel Command dated 28 May 2009, a copy of which
is attached. The‘Board also considered your letter 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.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel wiil 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 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,
Lo ean
W. DEAN PF F
Executive Divvec
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03038-09
, 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 | 03574-09
Finally, you impliedly requested removing the service record page 13 ("Administrative Remarks") entry dated 25 July 2008 and documentation of your removal from the Fiscal Year (FY) 09 Active Duty Chief Petty Officer Selection Board List.. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 2009, Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11978-08
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 | CY2011 | 04046-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 03625-10
Your request for investigation of the reporting Senior's actions was not considered, as the Board for Correction of Naval Records is not an investigative body. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2010. The Board also considered the NPC e-mail dated 3 September 2009 with attachment (DD Form 214), a copy of which is attached, and your letters dated 20 August 2009 with enclosures, 30 October 2009 and 2 February 2010.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00034-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 30 April 2009. The Board also considered your letters dated 9 and 13 April 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07246-08
Your request concerning your medal was not considered, as you may submit that request to the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) (PERS-312E). 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR413 13
You requested that your discharge of 10 August 2009 be voided; that you be awarded constructive service credit from 11 August 2009 to the date you would have attained 20 years of active duty service; ‘that all *red flag” actions be removed; that you be considered by a special selection board (SSB) for advancement to pay grade E-7; and that all records reflecting the substantiation of the sexual assault allegation against you be removed. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06448-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 September 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 23 July 2010 with attached e-mail, 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 | 06320-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting application on 2 injustice were r regulations and Board. in executive session, considered your February 2009. In addition, the Board considered the furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated copy of which is attached.