Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8557 14
Original file (NR8557 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

 

DIC
Docket No. NR8557-14
1 Apr 1:

 

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

record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.

R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on

30 March 2015. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed
in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documenta

 

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 16 January 2015,

a copy of which was provided to you on 7 February 2015, and is being
provided tc you now.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record,
the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient tc
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 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.

Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of
Docket No. NR8557-14

probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

ROBERT J. O'NETLL

SV Poms esraes arias eae diets

Hse nines ml.
YASUE VO dys s Cees

Enclosure: NPC memo 16 Jan i5

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | NR8602 14

    Original file (NR8602 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. 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 tne existence of Docket No.

  • 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 | NR10733 14

    Original file (NR10733 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. NR10733-14 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 | 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 | NR6382 14

    Original file (NR6382 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 DIC Docket No. BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 2015. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9209 14

    Original file (NR9209 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by HOMC memo 1400/3 MMPR-2 dated 30 January 2015, a copy of which is attached. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. NR9209-14 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 | 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 | CY2015 | NR059 15

    Original file (NR059 15.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 March 2015. Additionally, the Board considered your response to the Advisory Opinion dated 24 February 2015. : 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...

  • 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.