Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04127-12
Original file (04127-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

HD: hd
Docket No. 04127-12
13 September 2012

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

13 September 2012. 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 opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel
Command dated 14 May 2012, 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. 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,

Spo!

W. DEAN PF
Executive D or

Enclosures

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03451-12

    Original file (03451-12.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 September 2012. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this 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 | CY2012 | 04738-12

    Original file (04738-12.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 September 2012. 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 | CY2012 | 08146 12

    Original file (08146 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 February 2013. 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 | CY2013 | NR6340 13

    Original file (NR6340 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) has administratively removed the contested special evaluation and reinstated your original TIR and effective dates for pay grade E-6. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 20 September and 16 December 2013, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2338 14

    Original file (NR2338 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2015. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 16 July and 4 December 2014, 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 | CY2012 | 02302 12

    Original file (02302 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 June 2012. 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 n official naval record, the burden stence of probable material ity attaches to all off or a correction of a is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04836-11

    Original file (04836-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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. In any event, the Board was unable to find that this order, which directed you not to contact your wife without prior approval, was an illegal...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4646-13

    Original file (NR4646-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that the enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 March 2012 to 15 March 2013 be modified by raising the mark in block 45 (*Promotion Recommendation - Individual”) from “Promotable” (third best of five possible marks} to “the appropriate and proportional rating deserving of the work put forth.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2014. Documentary material considered by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10079 14

    Original file (NR10079 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that the evaluation and counseling record for 26 September 2011 to 27 January 2012 be modified by removing, from block 41 ("Comments on Performance”), “Member received counseling for unduly familiar relationship with subordinate and appears to have corrected behavior accordingly.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considerec your application on 16 March 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9101-13

    Original file (NR9101-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested completely removing the fitness report for 30 March to 6 August 2012 or, as a second preference, modifying the report by removing, from block 41 (“Comments on Performance”), “detachment for cause.” “A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof and...