Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00855-11
Original file (00855-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 §. COURTHOUSE ROAD CRS

ARLINGTON, VA 22204 Docket No: 855-11
12 January 2012

dear sno ;

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United
States Code, section 1552.

BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 11 January 2012. 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 opinion
furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC), 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 HOMC 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,

Executive cor

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05689 11

    Original file (05689 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2012. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by HQMC Memo 5000 RFF-DOSS02 dated 21 Jun 12 and HOMC Memo 1650 MMMA-3 dated 13 Oct 11, 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 | NR7884 14

    Original file (NR7884 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 § January 2015. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board dated 18 June 2014, the e-mail from HOMC dated 7 July 2014, and the advisory opinions from HOMC dated 2 September and 6 October 2014, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4717 13

    Original file (NR4717 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 14 August 2014. in addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Boarg (PERB) dated 17 May 2013, the e-mail from HOMC dated 18 July 2013, and the advisory opinions furnished by HOMC dated 18 February 2014 with attachment (MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, Subject: Promotion Recommendation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6102 14

    Original file (NR6102 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 26 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5207 14

    Original file (NR5207 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 18 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 | NR5141 14

    Original file (NR5141 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested fitness report. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB} dated 9 April 2014, the undated notes _ from the PERB, and the advisory opinion furnished by HOMC dated 28 May 2014, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00377 12

    Original file (00377 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 March 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, 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 | CY2012 | 06568-12

    Original file (06568-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 September 2012. 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 | NR876 14

    Original file (NR876 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 10 September 2014. Because of a civil court case Secretary of the Navy was directed to reconsider his decision made in the Records (BCNR) to consider your case regarding your forced retirement per the FY09 Colonel SRB. 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 | CY2013 | NR8611 13

    Original file (NR8611 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    — Tt is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested fitness report for 2 June 2011 to 28 February 2012 by filing a Memorandum for the Record showing that section A, item 6.a (“Commendatory Material”) is marked, and including in section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”) “Directed Comments: Item 6A: MRO [Marine reported on] was awarded a Meritorious Mast and two Letters of Appreciation during this reporting period.” A...