AL...
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7o1 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE ioot
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
HD
Docket No: NR12003-14
qy¥ Maren 2015
ference to your application for correction of your
ns of title 10 of the
This is in re
naval record pursuant to the provisio
United States code, section 1552.
er panel of the poard for Correction of Naval
ive session, considered your
tions of error and
A three-memb
Records, sitting in execut
application on 19 March 2015. Your allega
injustice were reviewed in accordance with adm
reguiations and
Board. bocumen
of your application, together with
tary material consi
all material submitted in
ral record anc applicable statutes,
support thereol, your neve-
regulations ang policies. In ad@ition, che Roard considered “he
2d
advisory opinion tyom Headquarters Maxine Corps (HOMC) dated
January 2015, a COPY of which is attached. The Board also
considered a COPY of your fitness report for 15 January to 2
October 2010, whose removal was directed by the HOMC Performance
Evaluation Review Board, and the HOMC e-mail dated 21 November
2014 (the basis for the PERB action), a COPY of which is also
attached. Finally, the Board considered you
2 March 2015 with attachments.
ideration of the entire
Rf ter careful a
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to es istence of probable material
error or injustice.
he comments containe
for the PERB decision to direct
t did not invalidate the contested
provided with your e-mail of
Pw
2 March 2015 did not persuade the Board that the entry in
question was erroneous or unjust. In this regard, the Board
particularly noted that the letter from the reporting senior
dated 29 January 2014 did not indicate that your relief for
cause, documented in the counseling entry, was unwarranted. 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
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6102 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2015. New evidence is 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9159 14
The Board and 18 December 2014 with also considered your y 2015 with enclosu enclosures, 9 Januar Information act reply dated 6 October 20 the command investigation dated 1 August with enclosures - applicatio injustice were regulations 4m 2014, copies ° 4 with redacted copy of 2013) and 6 March 2015 sideration of the entire itted was bable material ious con he ‘evidence subm tablish the existence of pro In this connection, the Board substantially omments contained in the reports of the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11369 14
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 | CY2014 | NR8731 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 2015. New evidence is 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 | NR8890 14
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 | CY2013 | NR8532 13
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 | CY2013 | NR4717 13
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 | CY2013 | NR8499 13
You requested removing the fitness report for 14 February to 10 June 2011 and your two rebuttals, each dated 8 June 2011, to the service record page 11 ("Administrative Remarks (1070)") entries dated 25 May and 1 June 2011, respectively. Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2015. Since the Board found insufficient grounds to remove either of your failures of selection for promotion, it had...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8902 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 2015. 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 23 September...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02684-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested fitness report. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2009. 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.