|
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON BC 20370-5100
RDZ:ech
Docket No. 07761-09
19 February 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 19 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
advisory opinion, from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 22 July
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 did not consider whether or not your discharge should
be upgraded due to the fact that since it is less than 15 years
old you must first appiy to the Navy Discharge Review Board
(NDRB). Please find enclosed a DD Form 293 that you must use to
have your Gischarge reviewed by NDRB. In the event NDRB does
not change your discharge you would be eligible to apply to this
Board.
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,
Dae
Executive Dine xr
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03313-09
Ddécumentary 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code due to the diagnosed personality disorders that appear to have existed prior to your entry into the service, which was not disclosed, causing your discharge by reason...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07730-09
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 advisory opinion, from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 22 July 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07796-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 12488-10
- A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, . 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04263-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record anc applicable statutes, regulations. Consequently, 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 | CY2010 | 12468-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 03119-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. The Board did not consider whether your characterization of service or reason for separation should be changed, since you have not exhausted your administrative remedies by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06855-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 February 2010. 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. 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 | 05088-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 2010. In the event that NDRB denies your application you would then be eligible to apply to this Board. 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 OF injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08296-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 2010. 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...