Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11838-09
Original file (11838-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 we

Docket No. 11838-09
8 November 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 4
November 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 enclosed advisory opinions
furnished by the Commandant of the Marine Corps dated 12 August 2010,
the Director, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards dated
13 September 2010.

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 from the Director, Secretary of
the Navy Council of Review Boards. The Board was not persuaded that
you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability when you
were released from active duty. 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,
" \ ard :

W. DEAN PFE
Executive D or

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08288-09

    Original file (08288-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 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 enclosed advisory opinion furnished by the Director, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards dated 14...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02636-09

    Original file (02636-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by Director, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards (SECNAVCORB) dated 1 July 2009 and 6 January 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 | 04835-09

    Original file (04835-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Director, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards dated 9 April 2010, 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 | 12400-09

    Original file (12400-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 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 | 00021-09

    Original file (00021-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Director, Secretary of the Navy Council of Personnel Boards dated 23 November 2009 and your response thereto. Among the records in that Folder are two civilian health record entries of note which you did not submit in support of your application.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08081-08

    Original file (08081-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Director, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards dated 7 December 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09862-09

    Original file (09862-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 December 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards letter CJS 1650/215 of 9 November 2010, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08237-09

    Original file (08237-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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. 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 | 08237-09

    Original file (08237-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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. 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 | CY2008 | 09198-08

    Original file (09198-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    09198-08 19 November 2009 FeS ee A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 November 2009. consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Censequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...