DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
fs Prati ‘hips
Beh ESRD. BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
[be Sine. has WA . ; _
Teg WHE Lie 794 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ps Se ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JET
Docket No. NR&266-13
12 Nov 14
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 i2 November 2014. 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 opinions furnished by OCNO memo 5420 Ser N133D/260 of
21 May 14 and OCNO memo 5420 Ser N133D/525 of 21 Aug 14, 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. In making this determination, the Board
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 wiil be furnished upon
request.
It ig 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
evidence within one year from the date of the Board's decision.
New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in this case. In this regard, it
is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity
Docket No, NR8266-13
attaches to all official records. Conseguentiy, when appiying
for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on
the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
a=.
Lo DA ieL
ROBERT J. O'NELUL
Bxecutive Director
Enclosures: 1. OCNO memo 5420 Ser Ni33D/260 of 21 May 14
a, 2. O@NO memo 5420 Ser N133D/525 of 21 Aug 14
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2086 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. NR2O086-14 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 | NR7121 14
In your own words you state “my recruiter and classifier at MEPS both failed to make me aware of the bonus I was entitled to as per my rate (AIRC), and time of entry.” Enlistment bonuses are not a Docket No. In your case it was not offered and you voluntarily signed up without the incentive of an enlistment bonus. 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 | NR7386 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of Docket No.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03815-06
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 material error or injustice. Members CONSUBPAY stopped upon transfer for not meeting the requirements of Ref(a).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7730 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2014. 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 | 13840-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9255 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval Docket No.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5418 14
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 DIC Docket No. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to cancel an agreement to extend enlistment. The Board, consisting of reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 1 December 2014 and, pursuant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9211 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. NR9211-14 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 | CY2001 | 06973-01
30 October 2001 A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on . 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. opinion furnished by CNP memorandum 5420 Ser which is attached.