Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1916 14
Original file (NR1916 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

bJCc
Docket No. NR1916-14

29 Oct 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

28 October 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 CNP memo 7220 Ser
N130C4/14U1218 dated 17 September 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 ox 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 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 cage. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Docket No. NR1916-14

on of an official naval

Consequently, when applying for a correcti
demonstrate the existence of

recora, the burden is on the applicant te
probable material error or injustice.

  

Sf ROBERT I. eo MELOL
Executive Director

Enclosure: CNP memo 7220 Ser W130C4/14U1218 dtd 17 Sep 14

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6533 14

    Original file (NR6533 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You were advised via our letter dated 24 September 2013 (your case was Boarded 23 September 2013), that your aoplication had been denied. Documentary materials considered by the Board consisted of your applicaticn, together with all materials submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and pclicies. after careful and) conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board) found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to etablish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2386 13

    Original file (NR2386 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 16 June 2014. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNP memo 7220 Ser N130C/13U0912 dated 16 October 2013, 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 | NR2478 14

    Original file (NR2478 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Boara for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 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. New evidence igs evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2628 14

    Original file (NR2628 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNP memo 7220 Ser N130C4/14U1228 dated 18 September 2014, a copy of which is attached. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. NR2628-14 on of an official naval Consequently, when applying for a correcti demonstrate the existence of record, the burden is on the applicant to probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9699 14

    Original file (NR9699 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 October 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. NPS69S-14 rection of an official naval Consequently, when applying for a cor demonstrate the existence of record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5674 14

    Original file (NR5674 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. NR5674-14 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 | NR1916-13

    Original file (NR1916-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 2013. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by OCNO Memo 7220 Ser N130D/13U0408 dated 9 May 2013, a copy of which igs 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 | CY2013 | NR4696 13

    Original file (NR4696 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. 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 CNP Memo 7220 Ser N130C/13U1070 dated > a copy of which is attached.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03021 12

    Original file (03021 12.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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 09489 12

    Original file (09489 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 2013. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNP Memo 7220 Ser N130C/12U1289 dated 13 November 2012, 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.