Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00176-11
Original file (00176-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 176-11
1 February 2011

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval
record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 1
February 2011. The names and votes of the members of the panel will
be furnished upon request. 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 correspondence from Headquarters
Marine Corps, Military Awards Branch, Manpower Management Division
dated 12 October and 4 November 2010, copies of which are 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. In
this regard, the Board substantially concurred with the comments
contained in the aforementioned correspondence. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken. As stated above, 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 P

Executive D

  

Enclosures

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03422-10

    Original file (03422-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. Further, the Board concluded that there was no evidence in the record to support a change of the RE-4 reenlistment code.

  • 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 | CY2011 | 04260-11

    Original file (04260-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2012. 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 | 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 | 03704-11

    Original file (03704-11.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 November 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your father’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 the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03433-10

    Original file (03433-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2010 | 06285-10

    Original file (06285-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 February 2011. In addition, the Board considered the decision of the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB) on 31 May 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 | 06605-10

    Original file (06605-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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 | CY2011 | 00627-11

    Original file (00627-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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 | CY2011 | 00701-11

    Original file (00701-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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