701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490
BAN
Docket No.NRO3976-14
7 November 2014
This is in reference to your request dated 25 January 2014, for a
reconsideration of your case. You originally petitioned the Board and
were advised in our letter of 17 November 2009, that your application
had been denied.
Your current request for reconsideration does not contain new evidence
not previously considered by the Board, or that was not previous
addressed in your original request. However, in light your highly
decorated award (Silver Star), your case was presented to the Board
out of respect for your exceptional service to our country.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5
November 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 material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board considered
the advisory opinion furnished by the Secretary of the Navy Council of
Review Boards letter 1650 NDBDM 158/14 of 8 Sept 2014, a copy of which
was provided to your counsel oni Oct 2014, and is being provided to
you now. Additionally, the Board also considered your counsel’s
response to the advisory opinion dated 29 October 2014.
However, 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 making this determination, the Board concurred with the comments
contained in the advisory opinion. Accordingly, your application for
reconsideration has been denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panei will be furnished upon request.
Therefore, your request for recongideration is denied and your case is
hereby administratively closed. Should you disagree with this
decision, your remedy is to appeal to a court of appropriate
jurisdiction.
OBER .
Executive Director
Enclosures
TC CC“ Ct srsi‘;’.Ct......tdddde EEE eee
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8308 14
However, you allege that you did not receive a copy of the partially favorable advisory opinion (2/0), since you did not agree with the approval dates. As explained in the Board’s previous partial approval letter, a case may only be reconsidered upon submission of new and material evidence. On 14 July 2014, your reconsideration request was approved.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6075 14
Evidence is considered to be material if it is likely to have a substantial effect on the outcome of the Board’s decision, On 16 April 2014, our office received your reconsideration request dated 9 April 2014, requesting a reconsideration of your case based on new and material information you provided (a response to the original advisory opinion). Therefore, a three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5667 14
on 4 September 2014, you have requested a reconsideration of your case. 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 | NR8289 13
Evidence is considered to be material if it is likely to have a substantial effect on the outcome of the prior Board's decision. The Board was not persuaded by the following issues, your counsel presented: 1) that it was unreasonable for Petitioner to respond to an advisory opinion (A/O) by the SBP Manager that was not fully formed, 2) that Petitioner should not have to agree to pay an undetermined amount of money prior to the Board's decision, and 3) that.there is a lack of an opinion from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3775 14
Your current request has been carefully examined by a three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 17 December 2014. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined your letter explaining the events concerning your civil arrest even though not previously considered by the Board, was insufficient to establish the existence of material error or injustice. New evidence is evidence not previously...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6683 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 April 2015. evidence not previously considered by the Board 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 probabie material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10921 14
your latest reconsideration request Your current request has been carefully examined by a three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 28 January 2015. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined that your assertion of post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), even though not previously considered by the Board, was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3463 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2014. 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 | NR5583 14
B three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Consequently, when applying fora 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 | NR6179 14
This request was denied on 30 September 2013. #, three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 22 January 2015. 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.