DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
RDZ:ecb
Docket No. 06855-09
19 February 2010
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of titie 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 16 February 2010. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. 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. In addition, the Board considered the
decision of the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB) and the Staff
Judge Advocate memorandum with enclosures dated 31] January 1995,
copies of which are 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 conclusions of law and fact set forth in the
NDRB decision and the Staff Judge Advocate memorandum.
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 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,
\ihues
W. DEAN PF
Executive Di
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06111-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2011. The Board also considered the advisory opinions from the Marine Corps Recruiting Command Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, dated 13 August and 28 December 2010, and the letter from this Board, dated 20 January 2011 with enclosures, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06958-09
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 | CY2010 | 05923-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 2011. 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 | 09382-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 2011. The Board likewise did not adopt the position taken’ by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABEMR).» docket 'nffrbex# AR20090011111, noting that the ABCMR acknowledged “the abggicant is not entitled to service credit for the ftime he spent in the USUHS Program.” The Board also noted that title 10, United States Code, section 2114 (b)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08244-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 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 | CY2001 | 06138-01
We are asked to provide an opinion on Petitioner's request that BCNR remove a Page 11 counseling entry and a "report of results of special court-martial" be removed from his record. e. Staff serges-oes not provide documented evidence to support his request to remove the page 11 entries from his service records. The Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) has requested that this Division review the subject named Marine's official military personnel files (OMPF) regarding his alleged...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Oct 12 10_38_11 CDT 2000
considered the advisory opinions furnished by HQMC, dated 24 May 1999, and the Marine Corps Recruiting Command, dated 12 July 1999, copies of which are attached. although Petitioner’s conviction was set aside, the underlying facts may nevertheless support Petitioner’s relief for cause. Once Petitioner’s record is cleansed of all references to his summary court—martial conviction, we conclude it would be appropriate for the Commandant of the Marine Corps to review the cleansed record to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00806-00
opinion furnished by the Assistant Staff Judge Advocate for Military Law, Headquarters Marine Corps dated 13 April 2000, a copy of which is enclosed. On 29 June 1987, Petitioner was convicted by a special court-martial of failure to obey a lawful order, willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer, resisting apprehension, and escape from custody in violation of Articles He was awarded confinement for 4 months, 90, 92 and 95 UCMJ. forwarding the case for appellate review, and he...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08332-98
They also considered the evidence considered at your nonjudicial punishment (NJP) proceedings, and your counsel’s undated rebuttal letter. The punishment imposed upon Petitioner and Petitioner does not deny the In reviewing Petitioner's case, however, Accordingly, we recommend that Petitioner's request for 7 . The uncontroverted matter of fact relative to removal of the fitness report Unless and until The Board's opinion, 4. vote, is that the contested fitness report should remain a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06624-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 April 2006. 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. Applicant fails to provide substantial evidence of probable material error or injustice in support of his application.