Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3043 14
Original file (NR3043 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
ACM AOTAACAIT OF THE ALAIN
ietcorweee fe

Fra S eaten ee
fe We Leer Arar iwicoiyr St
mS By, Ta sear WA ROARD TOR CORRECTION OF NAVAl RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2480

 

DIC
Docket No. NR3043-14
16 Sep 14

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval

record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.

BR 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 NPC memo 1160 Ser 813/162
dated 29 July 2014, a Copy of which is attached.

Bfter 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.

Sincerely,
iP

   
 

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Enclosure: NPC memo 1160 Ser 813/162 dtd 29 Jul 14

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0449 14

    Original file (NR0449 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 2014. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1160 Ser a13/101 dated 3 April 2014, a copy of which is attached. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3978 14

    Original file (NR3978 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. NR3978-14 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 | NR0204 14

    Original file (NR0204 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 9 June 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 | 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 | NR7313 14

    Original file (NR7313 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. 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 Docket No.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7501 14

    Original file (NR7501 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    NR7501-14 17 Mar 15 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 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8620 14

    Original file (NR8620 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 30 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 Docket No.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8685 14

    Original file (NR8685 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 30 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 Docket No.

  • 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 | NR2753 14

    Original file (NR2753 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of veference (a) Subject, hereinafter referred to as Pertitioner, filed enclosure {1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to establish entitlement to a zone “BY Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) . The Board, consisting of Mr. Zsaiman, Mr. George, and Mr. Ruskin, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 25 August 2014 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action...