DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAY Al RECORNS
7015S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SU! TE 100
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-24390
Dear Gunnery sergeant allay
This is in reference to your applicat
ion for correction of your
t to the provisions of title 10 of the
naval record pursuan
United States Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 20 November 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 opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 15 July
and 27 August 2013 and 19 May and 5 September 2014, COples of
which are attached, and your letter dated 13 August 2013 with
enclosures.
after careful and conscientious considerat
record, the Board foun
insufficient to establish the existence ©
error or injustice. In this connection, ©
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opi
except the recommendation, in the advisory opinion dated 15 July
2013, to modify the contested entry by removing the word
/ In this regard, the Board noted that paragraph 6105
the Marine Corps Separation and
the wording of entries such
the word vfyurther.” In
“further .'
of Marine COrps order P1900.16F,
Retirement Manual, which prescribes
as the one at issue, directs including
view of the above, 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 yeer 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 probable material
error or injustice.
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9159 14
The Board and 18 December 2014 with also considered your y 2015 with enclosu enclosures, 9 Januar Information act reply dated 6 October 20 the command investigation dated 1 August with enclosures - applicatio injustice were regulations 4m 2014, copies ° 4 with redacted copy of 2013) and 6 March 2015 sideration of the entire itted was bable material ious con he ‘evidence subm tablish the existence of pro In this connection, the Board substantially omments contained in the reports of the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8734 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2014. evidence not previously considered by the Board 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 | NR5265 14
Tt is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”) of the contested report for 30 September 2022 to 25 June 2013 by removing the word “capable” from the First sentence and in the fifth sentence, changing the comma after the word “complete” to a period and removing “MRO [Marine reported on] should attend MOS [military occupational specialty] school at first opportunity.” and modifying section...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6453 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9956 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2716 14
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 the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9351 14
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “I anticipate SNM [Subject Named Marine] will be removed from BCP [Body Composition Program] and be an asset to my command.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2014. New evidence is evidence not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4650 14
° A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 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. Consequentiy, 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 | NR7884 14
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 | CY2014 | NR4293 14
You requested removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) entry dated 23 October 2013 and your undated rebuttal. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.