Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0337 14
Original file (NR0337 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

HD
Docket No: NR337-14
8 May 2014

USN

 

Dear Petty Officer aay

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

8 May 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 and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. in addition, the Board considered the

advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) dated

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 advisory
opinion, noting that a memorandum has been filed in your record
correcting the beginning date of the contested performance
evaluation report from 16 November 2010 to 16 November 2009 and that
the error in block 45 (*Promotion Recommendation - individual”) was
in your favor. Concerning your statement to the report in question,
the Board noted that your letter of 31 March 2014 stated you were
submitting it to NPC (PERS-32), which can file it in your record with
the report at issue without action by the Board. 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,

. nd D, WA prmeenmnee

ROBERT D. ALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2013 | NR8212 13

    Original file (NR8212 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 2014. 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 | CY2014 | NR5153 14

    Original file (NR5153 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . 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 probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5093 14

    Original file (NR5093 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 NPC memo 1160 Ser 813/243 dated 16 October 2014, a copy of which is attached. NR5093-14 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3453 14

    Original file (NR3453 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 8 December 2014. material error or injustice. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board Docket No.NRO03453-14 prior to making its decision in this case, In.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4428 14

    Original file (NR4428 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 25 November 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 | CY2014 | NR2075 14

    Original file (NR2075 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 7 April 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, tthe burden is on the applicant to ‘demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2990 14

    Original file (NR2990 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 February 2015. 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07834-10

    Original file (07834-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that your selection for advancement to chief petty officer be reinstated as of your original projected effective date of advancement, 16 July 2007. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2011. 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 | NR3321 14

    Original file (NR3321 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 1 December 2014. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC (memo. NR3321-14 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.