Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00057-10
Original file (00057-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BAN
Docket No. 00057-10
26 March 2010

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
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 22 March 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. The Board considered the advisory
opinions furnished by the Deputy Director Casualty Assistance
Branch (N135C) of 1 Dec 09, and Naval Personnel Command (NPC)
memo 1430 Ser 811/075 of 27 Jan 2010, copies of which are
attached.

NPC has initiated action to administratively correct your
Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) election to show that you declined
participation. Upon completion of that action, you may expect a
refund of SBP costs previously deducted from your retired pay.

However, after careful and conscientious consideration of the
entire record regarding your request for promotion to the next
highest pay grade (E-7), the Board found that the evidence
submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of
probable material error or injustice. Accordingly, that part of
your request for correction 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 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,

Ww. Sse PREF
Executive D to
ee

Enclosures

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04012-10

    Original file (04012-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 December 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. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07682-98

    Original file (07682-98.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 March 1999. 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. (SBP) prior to the one year adoption recommend the BCNR not correct Chief 2.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01868-07

    Original file (01868-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1868-07 2 May 2007This is in reference to your application for correction of your 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 allegations oferror and the justice were * accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10678-06

    Original file (10678-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC Memo dtd 13 Apr 07, 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. 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 | CY2007 | 03152-07

    Original file (03152-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    3152-07 27 June 2007This is in reference to your application for correction of your 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 26 June 2007. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11253-07

    Original file (11253-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    11253-07 11 March 2008 DearThis is in reference to your application for correction of your 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 10 March 2008. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC Memo dtd 23 Jan 08, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02501-06

    Original file (02501-06.rtf) 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 NPC memo dtd 1 Dec 06, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01027-11

    Original file (01027-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 September 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your deceased former husband’s 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 04755-04

    Original file (04755-04.rtf) 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 NPC memorandum of 9 July 2004. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09563-02

    Original file (09563-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2003. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your spouse's naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. This statement identified him as a participant in the SBP Children only coverage, and he took no action to enroll his spouse.