Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8514 13
Original file (NR8514 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
701 >. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE

ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

JSR
Docket No: WR8514-13

In Novemnpe»r pui4

 

Dear Gunnery sergean {iy

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 15526

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 submitte
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the
reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance
Evaluation Review Board (PERB) dated 22 October 2013 and 18 July
2014 and the advisory opinions from HoMC dated 11 December 2013
and 21 August 2014, copies of which are attached, and your

letter dated 13 November 2013 with enclosure.

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 reports of the PERB
and the advisory opinions. aecordingly, 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 probable material

error or injustice.

Sincerely,

ROBERT J. O’ NEILL
Fxecutive Director

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11369 14

    Original file (NR11369 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The page 11 entry was not considered, as the attached e-mail dated 28 October 2014 from Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) shows that neither the entry nor your rebuttal appears in your Official Military Personnel File. A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its gecision in this case.

  • 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8532 13

    Original file (NR8532 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 24 July 2014. in addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 October 2013, the e- Mail from HQMC dated 19 November 2013, and the advisory opinions from HOMC dated 25 March 2014 with enclosure and 8 May 2014, copies of which are attached, - After careful and conscientious...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR157 14

    Original file (NR157 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 24 July 2014. 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 official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • 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 | NR8890 14

    Original file (NR8890 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 9 April 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. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9421 14

    Original file (NR9421 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 December 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in t support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board {(PERB), dated 8 August...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9151 14

    Original file (NR9151 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 20 November 2014. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 1 August 2014, and the advisory opinion from HOQMC dated 8 September 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 | CY2013 | NR8517 13

    Original file (NR8517 13.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 report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Fvaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 22 October 2013, and the advisory opinion from HQMC dated 8 January 2014, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2999 13

    Original file (NR2999 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 18 September 2014. The Board also considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) dated 18 February 2014 and the advisory opinion from HQMC dated 3 July 2034, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...