Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5114 14
Original file (NR5114 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 
   
 
   
  
    
   
 
 
 
 
 
   
  
    
  
   
   

SR oa ae
Docket No: NR5114-14

15 January 2015

 

Dear Staff Sergeant, Qayyyyp

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 precedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. 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. In addition, the Board considered the

advisory opinion from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 3 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,
noting that your undated rebuttal to the contested entry that
references paragraph 6105 of the Marine Corps Separation and
Retirement Manual is in your Official Military Personnel File.
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 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

 

that the circumstances of your case are such

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 | 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 | NR5001 14

    Original file (NR5001 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 6 November 2014, a copy of which is 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 | 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 | 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5373 14

    Original file (NR5373 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 | NR7048 14

    Original file (NR7048 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 January 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Docket No.NRU7048-14 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 | NR6493 14

    Original file (NR6493 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 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.