Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5001 14
Original file (NR5001 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
ROARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7015. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

JSR s |
Docket No: NR5001-14
16 January 2015

 

Dear Sergeant Fg

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 15 January 2015. 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 opinion from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 6 November
2014, a copy of which is 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 opinion.
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
evidence within

New evidence is
prior to making
is important to
attaches to all

 

one year from the date of the Board’s decision.
evidence not previously considered by the Board
its decision in this case. In this regard, it
keep in mind that a presumption of regularity
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.

Enclosure

Sincerely,

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6000 14

    Original file (NR6000 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 19 March 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 | NR5563 14

    Original file (NR5563 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 26 March 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10079 14

    Original file (NR10079 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that the evaluation and counseling record for 26 September 2011 to 27 January 2012 be modified by removing, from block 41 ("Comments on Performance”), “Member received counseling for unduly familiar relationship with subordinate and appears to have corrected behavior accordingly.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considerec your application on 16 March 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4650 14

    Original file (NR4650 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 15 January 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. Consequentiy, 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 | NR6882 14

    Original file (NR6882 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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 Docket No.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5295 14

    Original file (NR5295 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 15 January 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5160 14

    Original file (NR5160 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 15 January 2015. After carefui 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5114 14

    Original file (NR5114 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 15 January 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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 | NR12003 14

    Original file (NR12003 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board also considered a COPY of your fitness report for 15 January to 2 October 2010, whose removal was directed by the HOMC Performance Evaluation Review Board, and the HOMC e-mail dated 21 November 2014 (the basis for the PERB action), a COPY of which is also attached. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3268 14

    Original file (NR3268 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 @ January 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.