DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S$. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100i
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JSR
Docket No: NR438-14
12 June 7014
Dear Gunnery Sergeant 2
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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 12 June 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 materiai 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 25 April
and 8 May 2014, copies of which are attached, and your letter
dated 6 June 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. In this connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinions.
The Board was unable to find you were not counseled on 10 July
2012, or that you were not afforded an opportunity to submit a
rebuttal to the contested counseling entry. If you are correct
that the entry was not forwarded for file in your record within
30 days, the Board found this would not support removing it.
Finally, the Board was unable to find the investigating officer
who conducted the investigation on which the contested entry was
based did not advise you of your rights before interviewing you,
that he failed to consult with a judge advocate, that he failed
to interview necessary witnesses, or that the investigation
gleaned false information. In 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 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,
ROBERT BD. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05572-03
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 Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 26 June 2003, a copy of which is attached. The Board was unable to find the contested fitness report was given as a form of punishment.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5199 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 June 2014. Finally, the Board was unable to find the RS made inappropriate comments on your personal life. 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 | NR2425 14
° “A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considéred “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 | CY2002 | 06056-02
The petitioner has provided nothing to support his claim of injustice or that he was denied an opportunity to appeal the NJP (i.e., NJP occurred and was correctly recorded via the performance evaluation system. However, Petitioner did not appeal his punishment and does not claim that he was denied the right to do so. it is the NJP However, offenses.- C .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0348 14
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04942-07
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. The Board also considered your rebuttal letters dated 22 and 23 June 2007 and 28 September 2007, each with enclosures.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01679-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 2002. The Board was likewise unable to find that the Commander, Naval Surface Reserve Force denied your right to an interview with him; that he inadequately reviewed the DFC documentation; or that he wrongfully concurred with and forwarded the DFC recommendation. Since the Board found that the DFC and related fitness report should stand, they had no...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05808-01
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 20 July 2001, 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. was very little actual observation time by either the Reporting Senior or Reviewing Officer.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05330-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 18 June 2010 and the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations dated 2 August 2010, 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 existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09121-11
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. The Board found it was during the period of the contested fitness report that you received a formal counseling for your conduct before that period, as mentioned in section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”) of the report. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...