“RET
“|-
ar Hi eo no ues
Rc eae oF
rn Po hed A 2
Ae OE PSR CE OR
ei kt. bi ORB Ta m
701 §. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
ae rem ms
Pet fae ft
JSR
Docket No: NR2800-14
us ' same sr
— an evra
wh OY oVLo
SSCl qa Sc
Dear Staff Sergeant Qi
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 8 January 2015. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administretive
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. In addition, the Board considered the
advisory opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 1 and i6
October 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 advisory opinions
in concluding that the contested counseling entry dated 13 June
2010 should stand. Since the Board found insufficient basis to
remove the counseling entry, it had no grounds to remove the
fitness report for 31 December 2009 to 6 May 2010. 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 entitied 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. Consequentiy, 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 | CY2009 | 09849-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel’ Command undated and dated 10 December 2009 with enclosures, 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 existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11549-0p
"” A three-member panel .of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. 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 | CY2010 | 02693-10
You requested reconsideration of your previous application, docket number 9307-08, to modify the fitness report for 1 to 8 January 2007 by removing or amending the section I (reporting senior’s ‘Directed and Additional Comments”) comment “using his government cell phone to contact a woman, who was not his ‘spouse, on multiple occasions in a social manner.” This application was denied on 27 January 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05367-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 24 June 2010 with e-mail dated 16 June 2010 and 27 and 29 September 2010, 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 existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12849-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2011. 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 | CY2011 | 00145-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 10996-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the NPC dated 26 and 28 October 2010, 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 existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04896-09
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. As a result of your failure to disclose this information, your commanding officer (CO) initiated administrative discharge action by reason of misconduct due to fraudulent entry. On 25 June 1993, the discharge authority directed that you be discharged by reason of fraudulent enlistment with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04385-10
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 was not persuaded that it would be in the interest of justice to assign you a more favorable reentry code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval yecord, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the ‘existence pt probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07795-09
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 has no authority to consider claims of legal error at a court-martial, and must limit its review to determining whether clemency is ‘warranted ‘in the sentence. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...