DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. GOURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490
BAN
Docket No.NROO260-14
26 March 2014
This is in reply to your request for reconsideration on your
application to BCNR dated 27 September 2013.
BR review of our files reveals that in March 2006, you petitioned
the Board seeking a change to your record to reflect that you
were selected for advancement to E-7.
On 20 June 2006, after careful consideration of your request,
the Board heard your case and found insufficient evidence of an
error or injustice that would warrant the relief you sought.
Therefore, you were sent a letter on 20 June 2006, stating that
your case was denied.
In May 2007, you requested a reconsideration of that decision.
A case may be reconsidered only upon submission of new and
material evidence not previously considered that would have a
direct impact on the prior decision. New evidence is defined as
evidence not previously considered by the Board and not
reasonably available to you at the time of your previous
application. Evidence is considered to be material if it is
likely to have a substantial effect on the outcome of the prior
Board’s decision. In other words, even if your information was
presented to the Board, the decision would have inevitably been
the same. On 20 June 2007, you were sent a letter stating that
your reconsideration was not appropriate at that time and that
it was regretted that the facts and circumstances of your case
were such that a more favorable reply cannot be made.
In June 2010, you then submitted another letter requesting @
reconsideration of your request. Again, your request was denied
on 22 July 2010, based on that fact that no new or material
evidence was presented. in November 2012, you presented another
request asking for a reconsideration of the Board’s previous
Genial decisions. You case was denied on 18 December 2012.
On 27 September 2013, you have submitted yet another request for
reconsideration and you still have not provided any new or
material evidence to warrant a change to your record.
Under these circumstances it appears that you may wish to
contemplate initiating action in federal court.
I regret that the circumstances are such that a more favorable
determination cannot be made.
Sincerely,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 02264-12
Evidence is considered to be material if it is likely to have a substantial effect on the outcome of the prior Board’s decision. Therefore, you were sent another letter stating that your reconsideration was not appropriate at that time and that it was regretted that the facts and circumstances of your case were such that a more favorable reply cannot be made. You then sent another letter dated 5 September 2012, requesting another reconsideration and you still have not provided any new or...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1820 14
On 23 October 2013, you were sent a letter stating that your case was denied. You have not provided any new or material evidence that would change the Board’s decision. Therefore, your reconsideration request has been denied.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6075 14
Evidence is considered to be material if it is likely to have a substantial effect on the outcome of the Board’s decision, On 16 April 2014, our office received your reconsideration request dated 9 April 2014, requesting a reconsideration of your case based on new and material information you provided (a response to the original advisory opinion). Therefore, a three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9513 13
* However, as explained in the Board’s previous letter, a case may only be reconsidered upon submission of new and material evidence. Evidence is considered to be material if |.t is likely to have a substantial effect on the outcome of the Board's decision. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) meme 1070 JB Gf 72 Aug 2014, & COPY of which is being provided to you, see enclosure (25) « 1 tn 1983, you had been selected to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5667 14
on 4 September 2014, you have requested a reconsideration of your case. 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 | CY2013 | NR8289 13
Evidence is considered to be material if it is likely to have a substantial effect on the outcome of the prior Board's decision. The Board was not persuaded by the following issues, your counsel presented: 1) that it was unreasonable for Petitioner to respond to an advisory opinion (A/O) by the SBP Manager that was not fully formed, 2) that Petitioner should not have to agree to pay an undetermined amount of money prior to the Board's decision, and 3) that.there is a lack of an opinion from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6179 14
This request was denied on 30 September 2013. #, three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 22 January 2015. 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 | NR8308 14
However, you allege that you did not receive a copy of the partially favorable advisory opinion (2/0), since you did not agree with the approval dates. As explained in the Board’s previous partial approval letter, a case may only be reconsidered upon submission of new and material evidence. On 14 July 2014, your reconsideration request was approved.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10207-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2008. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011325
Counsel requests reconsideration of the applicant's previous request for correction of his records to show he retired by reason of permanent disability with a 100-percent disability rating. The ABCMR relied on the physical evaluation board's (PEB's) determination that the applicant's diagnosed condition of major depressive disorder was in full remission at the time of the hearing, thereby removing him from the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL). The decision granted his request for...