DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 §. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
DIC
Docket No. NR2618-14
16 Sep 14
TcaaaRRR RETR
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
15 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. In addition, the Board
considered the advisory opinion furnished by HOMC memo 1070 MIQ dated
23 July 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 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.
Sincexely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Fxeecutive Director
Enclosure: HOMC memo 1070 MIQ dtd 23 Jul 14
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3276 14
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 | CY2013 | NR8783 13
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. 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 | NR3705 14
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
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
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 | CY2014 | NR4499 14
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 | CY2014 | NR5272 14
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
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 | CY2013 | NR3743-13
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 | CY2013 | NR5809 13
MIQ did not address the entries dated 23 May or 17 July 2012. c. In enclosure (3), JAM, the HOMC Judge Advocate Division, Military Justice Branch commented to the effect that all the entries at issue should be removed, because the entries dated 23 January, 23 May and 17 July 2012 were improperly backdated, and the entries dated 20 January and 23 March 2012 were issued after Petitioner should have been promoted on 1 May 2011. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing - the...