SH
Ai DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Ney NA BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
wg
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No: 10284-10
5 April 2011
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 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. In addition, the Board
considered the advisory opinion from the Office of the Judge
Advocate General (OJAG), dated 15 February 2011, a copy of
which is attached. The Board also considered your counsel's
rebuttal letter dated 24 March 2011 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 from OJAG. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.
ena
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,
F
Executive D or
tey
Enclosure
Copy to:
David P. Sheldon, Esq.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01699-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6368 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an officer in the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing any and all derogatory material referencing the imposition of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 19 October 2011, for making a false official statement, a Punitive Letter of Reprimand (LOR) dated 23 October 2011, fitness reports (FITREP) for the periods of 11 March 2011 to 31 January 2012 and 1 February 2012 to 11 May...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09157-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 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 | CY2011 | 06563 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 2012. 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 | NR2541 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 April 2014. 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 Docket No.NRO2541-13 official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01261-08
A three-member panel of the Board for|Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your clients’ application on 24 November 2008. Your client is entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. 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 | 01469-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your client’s application on 8 September 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your client’s application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your client’s naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Thus, your client’s request for a personal appearance has been denied.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04313-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Finally, on 28 June 1993, CO, USS Merrill sent a letter-to the Commander, Bureau of Naval Personnel requesting the removal of the article 84 conviction and the repayment of $550.00 forfeited by Petitioner as a result...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01198-07
This advisory opinion recommended reconsideration of the applicants’ records, on the basis of the understanding that SECNAV had removed them from their AFQOL’s without knowledge that two of the other officers involved in the same matter had been promoted, and in the belief that only one of the three applicants’ NJP’s had been set aside.h. Counsel argued that these delays were actually based on the NJP’s that have been set aside.k. Finally, the Board notes the applicants were promoted to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01199-07
This advisory opinion recommended reconsideration of the applicants’ records, on the basis of the understanding that SECNAV had removed them from their AFQOL’s without knowledge that two of the other officers involved in the same matter had been promoted, and in the belief that only one of the three applicants’ NJP’s had been set aside. j- In enclosure (5), counsel further advised that each of the three applicants had received a letter dated 24 April 2007 from NPC informing them that their...