Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1724 14
Original file (NR1724 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490

 

BAN
Docket No.NRO1724-14
11 September 2014

 

This is in reference to your recent Application for Correction
of Naval Record (DD Form Da Gy «

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 September 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. The Board considered the advisory
opinion Furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) memo 5420
PERS-836/075 of 11 Jun 2014, with enclosures, copies of which
were provided to you on 26 Jun 2014, and 4s being provided to
you now. Additionally, the Board also considered your response
to the advisory opinion dated 6 August 2014.

However, airter 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 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.
pocket No. NROL7Z4-14

ere ie!

GoOorrectionu Ve an GOLLASitae+

Consequently, when applying for ac
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate tne
existence of probable material error oF injustice.

Sincerely,

AAD. -7

wets AS J
L070 Ob a F

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Enclosures

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1663 14

    Original file (NR1663 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the Board considered your response to the advisory opinion dated 20 September 2014. appearance, -However, 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. correction of an official naval to demonstrate the existence of this case.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7250 14

    Original file (NR7250 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 20 January 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. NR7250-14 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of 7 probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3493 14

    Original file (NR3493 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After careful and conscientious consi eration of the the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient establish the existence of probable material error or inj i this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. NR3493-14 Consequentiy, when applying for a correction of an otiicial naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR777 14

    Original file (NR777 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 10 September 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. However, after careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2476 14

    Original file (NR2476 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 CNPC Memo 1780 PERS-314 o— 1 Jul 14, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden igs on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR101 14

    Original file (NR101 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 10 September 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. Therefore, after careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3782 14

    Original file (NR3782 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 11 September 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support therecf 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 | NR3401 14

    Original file (NR3401 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7220 14

    Original file (NR7220 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 16 March 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 - probable material error or injustice.