DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY u
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 01876-10
3 September 2010
"(guile as Petre.
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
2 September 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 opinions furnished by the Navy
Personnel Command dated 25 March and 20 May 2010 with attached e-mail
dated 18 June 2010, copies of which are attached. The Board also
considered your letter dated 17 April 2010 with enclosures.
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 dated 20 May 2010. The Board was
unable to find whatever medical problem you had affected your
performance. Inview 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
NX reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence
Te
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,
\ Sens
W. DEAN ‘PFET
Executive to
Enclosures
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02301-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10801-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 06111-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2011. The Board also considered the advisory opinions from the Marine Corps Recruiting Command Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, dated 13 August and 28 December 2010, and the letter from this Board, dated 20 January 2011 with enclosures, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13099-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Bureau of Naval Personnel dated 28 February 2008, 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 | CY2010 | 08545-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 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 material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07717-10
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 also considered the advisory opinion from HQMC, dated 10 September 2010 with enclosures, a copy of which is attached. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was ‘ dnsufficient to establish the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13280-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2011. In light of the e-mail dated 20 December 2010, the Board was unable to find an adverse version of the fitness report for 1 June 2006 to 30 June 2007 was in your record considered by the FY 2009 Major Selection Board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06066-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 September 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery dated 14 July 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 | CY2010 | 06448-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 September 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 23 July 2010 with attached e-mail, 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.