Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10600 14
Original file (NR10600 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
ao a ah RU Kor See eS At A ss
WworA Mt veiwer wee tirbike mmr t
POARPR EOP COPRECTION OF NAVA RFCORMTS
701 5S. COURTHOUSE ROAC, Sure ave,

ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

JSR
Docket. No: NRI0600-14

hanrambher DF

fl

 

Dear Staff serge ii

This is 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 11 December 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 ed
of your application, together

support thereof, your naval

regulations and policies 7h

report of the Headquarters Marine

Review Board (PERB), dated 16

 

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 report of the PERB.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
reguest.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
E Cc e e t is

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
Executive Director

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03419-99

    Original file (03419-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    3 In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps ~erfa/rmance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 24 May 1999, a copy of which is attachM. 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. Sincerelv W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF T H E NAVY H E A D Q U A R T E R S U N I T E D STATES M A R I N E C ~ R P...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10695 14

    Original file (NR10695 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DErARIMWEMN! Ur the RAY T PAAR PARP FRM PFr Ee TION Ae NAN Se preompr 701 5, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100i ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Dear Master ‘

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02956-99

    Original file (02956-99.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. 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. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9956 14

    Original file (NR9956 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. 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 | CY1999 | 00130-99

    Original file (00130-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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. S u b j : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) HE CASE OF USMC The case is forwarded for final action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 04217-03

    Original file (04217-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 6 May 2003, 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. Per MCO 1610.11C1 the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 5 May 2003 to consider Staff serges-etition contained in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01967-99

    Original file (01967-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members resent, met on 16 March 1999 to consider Staff Sergean A t i t i o n contained in reference (a). Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02223-99

    Original file (02223-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has modified the contested fitness report by removing the sentence "Sgt [your last name] balances work and a difficult situation in an unselfish and unswerving manner." In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 29 March 1999, a copy of which is attached. The petitioner believes that the markings in Items 13c (administrative duties), 13e (handling...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03415-99

    Original file (03415-99.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. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of p--+able material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07986-01

    Original file (07986-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 2001. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 12 October 2001, a copy of which is attached. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation met on 10 October Sergean The petitioner contends the comments made by both th 2 .