DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD :hd
Docket No. 10020-0909
8 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. You requested, in effect,
removing all documentation pertaining to unauthorized absences
(UA's) in 1980 and 1981. You also requested removing
documentation that reveals your discharge on 19 June 1981 was
originally characterized as under other than honorable
conditions (the characterization was upgraded to general in your
previous case, docket number 1486-97}. Finally, you requested
that your digital record be corrected to remove the erroneous
designation of certain documents as a "Court Memorandum."
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 7 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
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 (NPC)
dated 22 October 2009, a copy of which is attached. The Board
also considered your letter dated 10 November 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.
The Board found its previous decision, a copy of which is on
file in your record, expressly did not condone your UA's or in
any way invalidate them, nor did it direct removing from your
record documentation inconsistent with the Board's action. You
may ask NPC (PERS-313D}) to correct the erroneous designation of
certain documents as a "Court Memorandum." In view of the .
above, 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,
\auk
W. DEAN P
Executive tor
Enclosure
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 | 11528-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2010. The Board particularly noted that on 8 February 2007, you submitted a copy of the report ending 31 October 2006 to the FY 08 Line Commander Selection Board, convened on 13 February 2007. 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 | CY2008 | 09966-08
panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 2009. in addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (N134) dated 3 April 2009, the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) (PERS-32) dated 7 May 2009, NPC (PERS-007) dated 10 June 2009 with enclosure and Nec (PERS-80) dated 7 October 2009, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01496-06
You further impliedly requested removing all documentation of your nonjudicial punishment (NJP) of 22 June 2005 and the vacation of suspension of your reduction to pay grade E-4 on 19 August 2005.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, consideredyour application on 7 December 2006. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00722-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the NPC dated 16 March 2009 with enclosure, 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 | 04173-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2010. 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 | CY2013 | NR2069 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2014. 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 | CY2010 | 11858-10
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 was unable to find that your circumstances prevented you from availing yourself of your opportunities to defend yourself or pursue redress regarding the contested performance evaluation reports. 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 | 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...