Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03871-10
Original file (03871-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX HD:hd

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No. 03871-10
6 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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August
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 Navy Personnel Command dated

21 May 2010, a copy of which is attached. The Board also considered
your letter dated 21 June 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 comment
contained in the advisory opinion. The Board was unable to find the
entry in block 9 (“Date Reported” } of the contested performance
evaluation report should have been 27 August 2007, rather than 4 May
2007. 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,
\oQus |

W. DEAN PFEI

Executive Di

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11189-10

    Original file (11189-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 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. 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 | 02535-10

    Original file (02535-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 2010. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion, but noted PRIMS reflects no BCA conducted on 8 May 2009 (it shows you were medically waived from the BCA conducted on 15 October 2009). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02693-10

    Original file (02693-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested reconsideration of your previous application, docket number 9307-08, to modify the fitness report for 1 to 8 January 2007 by removing or amending the section I (reporting senior’s ‘Directed and Additional Comments”) comment “using his government cell phone to contact a woman, who was not his ‘spouse, on multiple occasions in a social manner.” This application was denied on 27 January 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06527-10

    Original file (06527-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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 | 04044-10

    Original file (04044-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2011. 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 | CY2013 | NR1960 13

    Original file (NR1960 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 October 2013. 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 | 00883-10

    Original file (00883-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 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 | 09783-10

    Original file (09783-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2011. 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 | 08458-10

    Original file (08458-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed the requested modification of the report for 26 July 2006 to 28 February 2007. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 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 | 09849-09

    Original file (09849-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel’ Command undated and dated 10 December 2009 with enclosures, copies of which are 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.