Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01521-11
Original file (01521-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

HD:hd
Docket No. 01521-11
19 August 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

18 August 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 and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. in addition, the
Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Chief of Navy
Chaplains dated 31 May 2011 and the Navy Personnel Command dated
27 June 2011, copies of which are attached. The Board also
considered your letter dated 3 August 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. In
this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments
contained in the advisory opinions. The information found by the
Naval Inspector General investigation did not persuade the Board that
the promotion board acted improperly. 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,

\g)

W. DEAN PFEIFRE
Executive Di

Enclosures

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03618-11

    Original file (03618-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    2B three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2011. in addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 20 April 2011 with attachment and 21 April 2011 with attachments, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00426-11

    Original file (00426-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2011. 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 injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10874-10

    Original file (10874-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Director, Secretary of Navy Council of Review Boards dated 2 February 2011, 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 | CY2011 | 06215-11

    Original file (06215-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2010 | 07018-10

    Original file (07018-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 20 August 2010 and 14 March 2011, 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00169-11

    Original file (00169-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 3 March 2011, 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 | CY2011 | 00219-11

    Original file (00219-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) dated 4 February 2011, 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 | 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 | 06813-10

    Original file (06813-10.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 March 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 6 August 2010, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when feo 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 | 07673-10

    Original file (07673-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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...