Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3978 14
Original file (NR3978 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

 

bgc .
Docket No. NR3978-14
2 Dec 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

1 December 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
813/212 dated 30 September 2014), which was provided to you on or
about 1 November 2014; a copy of the advisory opinion is attached.

-After careful and conscientious consideration of the entiré 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 substahtially 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 case. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Docket No. 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.

 

ts . ROBERT J. O'NEILL
° Executive Director

Enclosure: NPC memo 1160 Ser 813/212 dtd 30 Sep 14

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 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 | NR3043 14

    Original file (NR3043 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | NR8899 14

    Original file (NR8899 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your application claims “I was not counseled on the effects of my ability to transfer 9/11 education benefits prior to reenlistment. The Board concurs with the advisory opinion that changing your reenlistment contract from 3 years to 4 years will not satisfy the *service obligation for transferring your Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits since you attempted the transfer in July 2014 vice May 2014. The Board has determined and agrees with the advisory opinion, that if you wish to be eligible to...