Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02755-11
Original file (02755-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

HD: hd
Docket No. 02755-11
27 October 2011

 

Dear Lieutenant gael

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 you be awarded an additional three years of entry
grade credit for your work experience before commissioning as an
officer of the Medical Service Corps.

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

27 October 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 furnished by the
Chief, Bureau of Medicine and Surgery dated 10 May 2011, a copy of
which is 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 connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments
contained in the advisory opinion. Accordingly, 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,

\Qang

Executive Dil

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01962-11

    Original file (01962-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 October 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02734-11

    Original file (02734-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 October 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command, PERS-32 and PERS~811, both dated 23 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 | 02584-11

    Original file (02584-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 October 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 22 and 23 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 | CY2010 | 10711-10

    Original file (10711-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04046-11

    Original file (04046-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 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. 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 | 01226-11

    Original file (01226-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 22 March 2011 with attachments, 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 | 10348-10

    Original file (10348-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 21 January 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your letter, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board's files on your prior cases, docket numbers 07328-08 and 04025-10, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00673-11

    Original file (00673-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 22 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 | 03701-11

    Original file (03701-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board also considered your counsel’s letters dated 11 November 2010 and 22 April 2011 with enclosure. Since the Board still found no defect in your fitness report record, it had no basis to recommend your advancement to either pay grade E-8 or E-9,. In view of the above, the Board again voted to deny relief.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04768-11

    Original file (04768-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 25 May and 9 June 2011, 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...