Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03446-11
Original file (03446-11.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. 03446-11
21 July 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 21 July
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 Navy Personnel
Command dated 18 May 2011 with attachment, a copy of which is
attached. The Board also considered your letter dated 28 June 2011
with enclosures.

After careful and conscienticus 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. While the Board recognized the
determination of guilt in your case was deferred for two years, it
found that the action of the court placing you on probationary

diversion for two years and entering a protective order for two years
Was an action “tantamount to conviction” for purposes of Bureau of
Naval Personnel Instruction (BUPERSINST) 1070.27C, enclosure (1),

paragraph 1.b(2)(a)3. 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

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,

Ween

IYFE
Executive Ditéc

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03293-11

    Original file (03293-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested, in effect, removal of decumentation of your detachment for cause. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 9 May 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, Sincerely, Enclosure

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06205-11

    Original file (06205-11.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 September 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 11 July 2011, a copy of which is attached.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08895-10

    Original file (08895-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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 | CY2010 | 09783-10

    Original file (09783-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 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 | 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 | 10612-10

    Original file (10612-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your previous case, docket number 018976-10, was denied on 2 September 2010. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 6 October 2011. In addition; the Board considered the e-mail advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) dated 21 September 2010 with attachments and the National Naval Medical Center (NNMC) Bethesda dated 22 August 2011 with attachment, copies of which are attached.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12202-09

    Original file (12202-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You request promotion to lieutenant commander with an effective date of 24 July 2009. AR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. 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 | 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...