Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2891-13
Original file (NR2891-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

704 5, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 702%
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

JET
Docket No. NR2891-13
11 Oct 13

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 11 October 2013. 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 CNRFC Memo 5420 Ser N1/0846 dtd 24
Jul 13, 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
Docket No. NR2891-13

naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,
\ wok
W. DEAN PFETREE

Executive Direetor

Enclosure: CNRFC Memo 5420 Ser N1/0846 dtd 24 Jul 13

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 08830 12

    Original file (08830 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 3 September 2013. 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 CNRFC Memo 5420 Ser N1/0583 dtd 22 May 13 and CNRFC Email dtd 25 Jul 13, a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 09526 12

    Original file (09526 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 6 August 2013. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNRFC Memo 5420 Ser N1/0654 d@td 11 Jun 13, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official Docket No.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00121-12

    Original file (00121-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 2012. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNRFC Ltr 5420 Ser N1/918 dated 30 July 2012, 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 | CY2014 | NR11287 14

    Original file (NR11287 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by CNRFC letter 5420 Ser N1/0194 dated 4 March 2015 and CNRFC letter 5420 Ser N1/0562 dated 16 May 2014, copies of which are attached. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. NR11287-14 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 | CY2014 | NR1885 14

    Original file (NR1885 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ef 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 CNRFC Memo 5420 Ser N1/c537 of 14 May 14, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden 15 0 existence of probable materia Enclosure: Docket No.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00635-12

    Original file (00635-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 2012. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNRFC Ltr 5420 Ser N1/957 dated 3 August 2012, 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 | CY2013 | NR0941-13

    Original file (NR0941-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member pane] of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2013. 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 | CY2014 | NR4448 14

    Original file (NR4448 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 November 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. NR4448-14 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 | CY2014 | NR5148 14

    Original file (NR5148 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 CNRFC ltr 5420 Ser | N1/1263 dtd 22 Dec.14, a copy of which is attached. NR5148-14 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01421-11

    Original file (01421-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 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...