Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09629-09
Original file (09629-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

WJH
Docket: 9629-09
20 Oct. 2010

 

Section tel

This is in reference to your application for correction of
naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 18 October 2010. Your allegations of error
and injustice were reviewed in accordance with the
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, regulations and policies.
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion
furnished by the Navy Personnel Command letter 5730 Ser 95/
of 20 July 2010, 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. In the Board's view, you had ample time
to use your accrued and respite leave. 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
Docket: 9629-09

submission of new and material evidence or other matter not
previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is
also 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,

® New

W. DEAN TE
Executive Di tlor

fH

 

 

i)

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10693-09

    Original file (10693-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 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 | CY2009 | 10412-09

    Original file (10412-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2010. The Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion dated 20 October 2009 in concluding that the contested original fitness report should stand. 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 | 13167-09

    Original file (13167-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. In addition, the Board gonsidered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 20 January 2010, a copy of which ig 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 | 12202-09

    Original file (12202-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You request promotion to lieutenant commander with an effective date of 24 July 2009. AR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. 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 | 10904-09

    Original file (10904-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ° A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 12 November 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 | CY2009 | 11347-09

    Original file (11347-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    - A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) dated 1 and 15 December 2009, 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 | 03010-09

    Original file (03010-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ef your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09643-09

    Original file (09643-09.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 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 | CY2009 | 12277-09

    Original file (12277-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 February 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Navy Personnel Command (NPC) memo 1430 Ser 811/052 of 20 Jan 10, 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 | 13251-09

    Original file (13251-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 March 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, In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memorandum 1430 Ser 811/049 of 20 January 2010. This is an advisory memorandum...