DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 5. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JSR
Docket No: NR1695-14
17 Aprii 2014
Dear Gunnery Sergeant Ey
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the
Unite@a States Code, section 1552.
re A
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 17 April 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 ail 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
Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 31 January 2014, and the
advisory opinion from HQMC dated 2 August 2013, 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
and the advisory opinion. The Board noted that Addendum Page 3
of 6 appears to be invalid, as it purports to be a continuation
of the reviewing officer (RO)’s comments, but it identifies him
when the RO was actually
he Board observed that you may
to remove that page. 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,
2 hnactk &,
ROBERT D“ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
cat, abe Engh Be.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7247 14
and by removing “Directed Comment, Sectfion] A, Item Tb: recommend that the MRO [Marine reported on] not be considered for promotion with his contemporaries.” 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8716 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4252 14
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed the requested changes to the marks in sections E.2, F.1 and G.1. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 May 2014. 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 | CY2008 | 10350-08
concurred with the rd also considered your rebuttal letter dated ith enclosure. The Board could not find the reviewing officer (RO) lacked sufficient lobservation to evaluate you, noting observation need not be direct. 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 | NR10593 14
Although the Board voted not to modify the fitness report in question, you may submit the RO’s letter to future selection boards. 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 | NR7880 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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 | NR7878 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 Bugust 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 | NR8180 14
Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24. 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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8180 14
Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24. 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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4761 14
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has Girected modifying the contested report for 28 April to 31 December 2011 by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's (RO’s) comments), “MRO [Marine reported on] continues to develop and hone skills required to effectively support Special Operations Marines in combat operations.” and further directed removing the entire section K (RO’s marks and comments) from each of the other three reports at issue. A three-member panel...