Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1221 14
Original file (NR1221 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
—TLI RIAL
EERO ren =
i
F

701 §. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1004
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

pICc
Docket No. NR1221-14
5 Aug 14

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval
record pursuant fo 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

4 August 2014. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed
in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable te the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material

- considered by the Board consisted of yout application, together with
all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and
applicable etatutes, regulations and policies. in addition, the Board
consigered the advisory opinion furnished by MCRC memo 1610 G-i dated

30 April 2014, a COPY of which 1s 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 oF injustice. In
this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments
contained in the advisory opinion. pocordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be

furnished vwpon 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

regularity attaches to all official records. Consequentiy, 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,

ROBERT D. ALLMAN
Acting Executive pirector

Enclosure: MCRC memo 1610 G-1 atd 30 Apr 14

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5733 13

    Original file (NR5733 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 10 March 2014. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by MCRC Memo 5400 G-3/0A dated Qa 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 | CY2008 | 05607-08

    Original file (05607-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT BOARD FOR CORRECTION 2 NAVY A WASHINGTON DC This is in reference the applicati mMaval record pursuant to the provi | | IA three-member panel of the Board Records, sitting in executive/ sess application on 24 November 2008. injustice were reviewed in ac¢orda regulations and procedures applica Board. Documentary material ¢onsi regulations and policies. your ¥ 1 t After careful and conscientious c record, the Board found that the insufficient to establish the exi error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1774 13

    Original file (NR1774 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 9 June 2014. The Board carefully considered all of the arguments raised in your application and the evidence your counsel submitted regarding those claims. 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 | NR5420 14

    Original file (NR5420 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 2 March 2015. Accordingly, your application to reduce your contract term to reflect 4 years, as well as your request for a personal appearance before the Board, have been denied. New evidence is evidence Docket No.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00933-07

    Original file (00933-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    933-07 12 Apr 07This 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 10 April 2007. 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6005 14

    Original file (NR6005 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. NR6005-14 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 | CY2007 | 01096-07

    Original file (01096-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1096-07 19 Apr 07This 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 17 April 2007. 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 03925-04

    Original file (03925-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing therefrom the fitness reports for 1 January to 1 April 2002, 2 April to 22 June 2002, 23 June to31 December 2002, 1 January to 30 June 2003, and 1 July to26 August 2003. We do not, however, recommend that his voided MOS 8411 be reinstated and the recoupment of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03055-11

    Original file (03055-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 September 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 | CY2001 | 06191-01

    Original file (06191-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 by removing the fitness report for 15 March to 14 August 2000, a copy of which is at enclosure (1). The Board, consisting of Messrs. Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 15 August 2001, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be...