Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR101 14
Original file (NR101 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
A neon DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

:

eT NS

EN ee ya
[pe somoy. 7) peer Wom BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL REC RDS

ee

   

|
a 701 §. COURTHOUSE RD Si NTE 1004

ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490

BAN
Docket No.NROO101-14
11 September 2014

De

This is in reference to your recent Application for Correction
of Naval Record (DD Form 149) in October 2013, and your addendum
in March 2014.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 September 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. The Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) memo
1400/3 MMPR-2 of 19 May 2014, (with an enclosure), copies of
which were provided to you on 29 Jul 2014, and is being provided
to you now. You had the opportunity to respond within 30 days,
but failed to do so.

Therefore, 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 making this determination, the Board
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory 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.
For 2 correction of an

whee amnluine

CuMsequencsy vy r WOET Gppiy seeu

naval record, the burden is on t
existence of probable material error or in

- 1 1
he applicant to demonstrate the
justice.

Sincerely,
LI ATM ~
Cpw f (SAAT LS

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Enclosures

: »-

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR777 14

    Original file (NR777 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. 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. However, after careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5107 14

    Original file (NR5107 14.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 your response to the advisory opinion dated 7 Nov 2014, However, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5131 13

    Original file (NR5131 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 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4162 14

    Original file (NR4162 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 5 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 | NR2156 14

    Original file (NR2156 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 25 November 2014. 4 However 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5667 14

    Original file (NR5667 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2014 | NR4400 14

    Original file (NR4400 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 13 November 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Docket MNo.NkKO44U0-14 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an ofiiciai naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0894 14

    Original file (NR0894 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 21 July 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with Adil material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Therefore, your case was provided to the Board as is for final determination.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3872 14

    Original file (NR3872 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 25 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6453 14

    Original file (NR6453 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 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.