DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 13234-09
2 August 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 correction of your naval record
to show you were commissioned in the grade of lieutenant junior grade
(pay grade O-2E), rather than ensign (pay grade O-1E) by virtue of
entry grade credit for your master’s degree in business
administration.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 July
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 and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the
advisory opinion furnished by the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery
dated 8 January 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. The Board was unable to find the
circumstances of the other two officers you cited, who were
commissioned in the grade of lieutenant junior grade, were identical
to yours. 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,
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09741-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) dated 27 September 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 | CY2008 | 02806-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 August 2008. 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 dated 21 May 2008, a copy of which is attached.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04260-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2012. 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 | CY2009 | 08488-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 October 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 21 September 2009, a copy of which is attached. The advisory opinion, which recommends approving your request, says you met the requirements for promotion to lieutenant junior grade and that you accepted your appointment on 27 July 1956.
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 | CY2002 | 00787-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 May 2002. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Chief, Bureau of Medicine and Surgery dated 8 April 2002, a copy of which is attached, and your letters dated 26 February and 17 May 2002, each with enclosure. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07690-01
You requested that your lieutenant date of rank and effective date be changed from 1 October 2001 to 1 April 2001 A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 June 2002. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03242-01
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In this regard, and it is 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. master program E in healt h ’s (c) t Each reference clearly states a qualifyin a concentration in health care selected did not include a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05944-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 2008. 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 | 03965-09
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. after the dismissal was approved at all level of review, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Manpower and Reserve Affairs, directed the execution of your dismissal from the Naval Service, and on 5 May 2006, you were issued a letter of dismissal. Consequently, when applying for a...