Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4949 14
Original file (NR4949 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

TJR
Docket No: 4949-14
11 February 2015

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 10 February 2015. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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. In addition, the
Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by Headquarters
Marine Corps, 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 regard, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinions.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.

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 J. O’NEILL
Executive Director

Enclosures

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7483 14

    Original file (NR7483 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 10 February 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. 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 | NR6307 14

    Original file (NR6307 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 10 February 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. 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 | NR8483 14

    Original file (NR8483 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 10 February 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. : Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8075 14

    Original file (NR8075 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 3 February 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your 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 | NR8527 13

    Original file (NR8527 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 February 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your 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 | NR3378 14

    Original file (NR3378 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 December 2014 and requested that an additional advisory opinion be obtained from the Navy Personnel Command (NPC). The Board also considered your letter dated 12 September 2014 with enclosures and your e-mail dated 10 December 2014. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2990 14

    Original file (NR2990 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 12 February 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. 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 | NR7189 14

    Original file (NR7189 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 opinion furnished by OCNO memo 7220 Ser N130C2/15U0151 dated 5 February 2015, a copy of which was provided to you on 7 February 2015, and is being provided to you now. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4576 14

    Original file (NR4576 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    — A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, . In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Administrative Law), dated 24 March 2014, Chief of Naval Personnel, dated 14 October 2014, and Commander, Navy Recruiting Command, dated 26 November 2014, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8248 14

    Original file (NR8248 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 14 May 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.