DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-24980
HD
Docket No: NR5109-14
19 March 2015
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
19 March 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 and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the
advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Commanc dated
5 and 10 December 2014, copies of which are attached. The Board also
considered your letter date@ 13 February 2015 with enclosure.
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 advisory
opinions. The Board found that the favorable result of your Board
of Inquiry did not make it erroneous or unjust that the contested
documentation was entered in your record. Since the Board found
insufficient basis to remove any of the documents at issue, it had
mo grounds to remove your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year
15 Staff Commander Selection Board. 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.
Per your request, a copy of reference (a) to the advisory opinion
dated 10 December 2014 is attached.
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 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.
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'NETLL
Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2990 14
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 | NR9152 14
You requested completely removing the fitness report for 5 April to 30 November 2007, and you impliedly requested removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 20615 Major Selection Board. In this regard, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion in finding your selection by the FY 2015 promotion board would have been definitely unlikely, even if your record had reflected the modifications CMC has directed to the fitness report at issue. Consequently, when:...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8499 13
You requested removing the fitness report for 14 February to 10 June 2011 and your two rebuttals, each dated 8 June 2011, to the service record page 11 ("Administrative Remarks (1070)") entries dated 25 May and 1 June 2011, respectively. Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2015. Since the Board found insufficient grounds to remove either of your failures of selection for promotion, it had...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9421 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 December 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in t 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 8 August...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2944 14
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative reguiations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board, Documentary material considered by the Board consiste@ of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10595 14
You requested modifying the fitness report for 16 July 2012 to 31 May 2013 by making section K (reviewing officer's marks and comments) “not observed.” You further requested removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year 2015 Major Selection Board. It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has irected the requestea modification of the fitness report in R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2015 | NR08 15
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 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 | 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8902 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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, In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Fvaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 23 September...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3990 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 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.