Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR157 14
Original file (NR157 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 8, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

JSR
Docket No: NR157-14
24 July 2014

 

Dear Chief Warrant Officer Qa

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 24 July 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
report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance
Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 20 December 2013, as
amended by the report dated 4 February 2014, and the advisory
opinions from HOMC dated 20 May 2013 and 6 May 2014, copies of
which are attached.

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
as amended and the advisory opinions. 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.

. 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 D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5265 14

    Original file (NR5265 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Tt is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”) of the contested report for 30 September 2022 to 25 June 2013 by removing the word “capable” from the First sentence and in the fifth sentence, changing the comma after the word “complete” to a period and removing “MRO [Marine reported on] should attend MOS [military occupational specialty] school at first opportunity.” and modifying section...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8514 13

    Original file (NR8514 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitte 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. 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 | NR8532 13

    Original file (NR8532 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 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 | CY2014 | NR8278 14

    Original file (NR8278 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 7 August 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 | CY2014 | NR11369 14

    Original file (NR11369 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2013 | NR4717 13

    Original file (NR4717 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 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 | NR3114-13

    Original file (NR3114-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2013. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8611 13

    Original file (NR8611 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    — Tt is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested fitness report for 2 June 2011 to 28 February 2012 by filing a Memorandum for the Record showing that section A, item 6.a (“Commendatory Material”) is marked, and including in section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”) “Directed Comments: Item 6A: MRO [Marine reported on] was awarded a Meritorious Mast and two Letters of Appreciation during this reporting period.” A...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1714 14

    Original file (NR1714 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 2 October 2014. In addition, the Board considered the reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 4 February 2014 and 18 July 2014 as amended by the HOMC e-mail dated 5 August 2014, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2999 13

    Original file (NR2999 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 18 September 2014. The Board also considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) dated 18 February 2014 and the advisory opinion from HQMC dated 3 July 2034, 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...