Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8783 13
Original file (NR8783 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SLHTE 1004
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

DIC
Docket No. NR8783-13
3 dun 14

 

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

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

2 June 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 opinion furnished by HOMC memo 1070 MIQ dated 18 March
2014, 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 @ 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,

Ryetds),
ROBERT D, ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Enclosure: HOMC memo 1070 MIQ dtd 18 Mar 14

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2618 14

    Original file (NR2618 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 15 September 2014. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by HOMC memo 1070 MIQ dated 23 July 2014, 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 | NR3276 14

    Original file (NR3276 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 28 October 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. NR3276-14 rrection of an official naval Consequentiy, when applying for a co demonstrate the existence De record, the burden is on the applicant to probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3705 14

    Original file (NR3705 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted cf your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. ble material error or injustice. year from the date of the Board's decision.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3524 13

    Original file (NR3524 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Messrs. Hicks, Spooner and Swarens, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 21 August 2014, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. g. In enclosure (8), MIQ commented to the effect that in light of enclosure (7), the contested BCP assignment and page 11 entries should be removed. of enclosures (5) and (8), the Board finds the existence of an error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2475 13

    Original file (NR2475 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 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, In addition, the Board considered the regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8518-13

    Original file (NR8518-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    2, The Board, consisting of Messrs. Boyd, Chapman and Spain, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 20 Maxch 2014, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. c. That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating to the Board's recommendation be corrected, removed or completely expunged from Petitioner's record and that no such entries or material be added to the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4499 14

    Original file (NR4499 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 ord and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. NR4499-14 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 | CY2013 | NR3743-13

    Original file (NR3743-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Finally, by implication, he also requested removing the page 11 entry dated 3 August 2011. The Board, consisting of Ms. Lapinski and Messrs. Gorenflo and Hicks, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 13 March 2014, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11(b) (“Administrative Remarks...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5272 14

    Original file (NR5272 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Messrs. Hicks, Spooner and Swarens, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 20 November 2014, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. e. In enclosure (6), MIQ again commented to the effect that the contested entry dated 6 January 2012 should stand, but further commented to the effect that Petitioner’s request to remove the entries dated 14 December...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3337 14

    Original file (NR3337 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1004 ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490 BAN Docket No.NRO3337-14 10 October 2014 This is in reference to your application for correction to your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 United States Code, section L552 A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in...