Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06111-10
Original file (06111-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 6111-10
11 April 2011

ee a:
eres

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 that your naval record be corrected to show you
were commissioned as a second lieutenant in the Marine Corps
with a date of commissioning and date of rank of 1 September
2007 .

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 7 April 2011. 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 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. The Board
also considered your counsel's letters, dated 15 September 2010
and 14 January 2011, and the Office of the Inspector General,
Marine Forces Reserve letter dated 18 December 2007

(unredacted) .
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 advisory opinions.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
yotes 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,

W. DEAN aa
Executive Dsretto

Enclosures

Copy to:
Ken B. Martin, Esq.

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00446-10

    Original file (00446-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You finally impliedly requested removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") counseling entry dated 25 January 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. Further, the (enclosure Board was unable to find your promotion would not have been delayed, had the results of the inspection, which was conducted on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03202-11

    Original file (03202-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 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 | 13803-10

    Original file (13803-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 May 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 | 12425-10

    Original file (12425-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You now request that the report for 2 October 1980 to 31 January 1981 be modified by addition of the reporting senior’s (RS’s) undated letter, and you again request removing the other two reports. 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, and the Board’s file on your prior case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00476-10

    Original file (00476-10.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. Finally, the Board denied your request to be allowed to retire. On 15 August 2007, your appeal was denied and you were separated with a dismissal due to your conviction at a GCM.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01445-11

    Original file (01445-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your case on 18 August 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 24 March 2011 and 6 July 2011 with enclosure, and the Marine Corps Recruiting Command dated 31 March 2011, copies of which are attached, and your letter dated 4 August 2011. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02384-10

    Original file (02384-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 July 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 | 08545-10

    Original file (08545-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2011 | 02003-11

    Original file (02003-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 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, wher applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00084-12

    Original file (00084-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the report for 1 January to 12 May 2009 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “Upon completion of his scheduled PME [Professional Military Education] .” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2012. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your...