Ihe ae MeN! Or THE NAVY
——
OARD FOR CORRIFCTION OF NAVAL ROFGORDS
701 5S. COURTHOUSE KUAL, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
HD
Docket No: NR5583-14
12 December 2014
ee ee eee aa
oer ee ae
eae
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.
B three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
11 December 2014. Your allegations of error and injustice were
reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and
procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary
7 se
material considered by the Board consisted of your application,
hes : : a
sf with all MmMaceriel SUDMLT
Q
QO
BZ
=
—
w
is]
oO,
OL
a)
ct BP
(D
Oo
he
es
©
Q
a
o.
o
(D
BK
bo
oO
pa)
its
Dy
QO
oO
mB
het
O
Ph
=
By
=
Q)
t
#
wy
3]
Boe
Ww ct
)
after careful and conscientious consideration of the entir record,
the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to
establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
The Board was unable to find the errors on your fitness reports for
1 November 2007 to 31 October 2008 and 1 November 2008 to 31 May 2009
and the associated errors on your Performance Summary Report
concerning the reporting senior’s “Cumulative Averag
number of lieutenant commander fitness reports he had written were
a factor in your failures of selection by the Fiscal }
Staff Commander Selection Boards. In this re 1
particularly noted that the reporting senior’
dated 8 February 2013 for the report for 1 November
2008, submitted
S616Ction, rel
oO
r the promotion boards by whic
x ka a
that your mark in block 42 (“Promotion
Recommendation - Individual”) should have been “Must Promote”
(second best of five possible marks), rather than “Early Promote”
(best); and that block 43 (“Promotion Recommendation - Summary” )
should have shown you ranked below one other officer, rather than
alone. Inview of the above, 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. Youare 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 fora 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
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5899 14
1 \ o M H " o 3 ; cs c = . et oO ) { 1 v | oO Vv a 'O a ‘ { ct Pa a 13 a os { a J p = se ) w ¢ va OU wW 4 s 4 ud : a 1 1 O 4H Sak oO = cg a 4 Hw OO ms ‘ ul 1) $4 i oO a ee ' q U oO iJ Y a 3 i ~ w ae a y w oO ) \ , ec ; O & /) — eH ri ++ 4 1 } ans QO . oO ¢ 2 yw cof x ci a4 a 1 O-4 Oo x $} G@ O M 2 oO =A YD i io i) ri = O WH © + m4 ~~ = r { > = > = O-d ia Bon © - > za ou mM WO cl » 3 wa w oan it a Hoo @ y Oc e 1 HG El le Za HOW 6 an.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2932 14_Redacted
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRICCTION Or KAVA ROCeCRDS 7ors, COURTHOUSE FOoAeU, SUI 1@a7 te ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 st No: 2932-14 31 October 2014 This is in reference to your applica tien of your naval record pursuant + t of the United ae 4 V6 tates Code, section 15 Although your application was Board found it in the interes limitations and consider your thy ember panel of the Boa é session, he names 4 a) (D m ct © QO O Q aM 2 Ge Cc BK {T i 4 Q) LS) Ce...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR764 14_Redacted
Although your application was not filed in a time Board found it in the interest of justice to wai limitations and consider your application on its three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2015. After consulting with legal counsel, you lected to present your case to an administrative discharge board — (0 94...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11960 14
BK Qa 20 w f the Board for Correction of Naval executive session, considered your 1 2015. eae a ———— se eee 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 | NR11485 14
NGTON, VA 22204-2490 your application o the provisions Cc o A three-member panel Records, sitting ine L e application on 16 December 20 members of the panel will Your allegations of error and in accordance with administrative applicable to the proceedings material considered by the Bo 1 S together with all material su naval record, and applicable ne ae tue a a qa He wage ? we Wat — Wa eoe ame Se LY st te QO SG oO i e in eA} On b- p- a] pe tO Oo 3 Qa OQ RE oom o wy i) 3 -Orcda = Mm mn...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8123 14
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Board for Correction of Naval Records of the Navy 2. The Board, consis reviewed Petitioner's 5792 23 March 2015 and, Pf : tt mM f b- yorsp Hw 0 @ or Hs | OM & ct QQ Y Fh cr .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07857-08
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed the requested changes to sections E.2, F.1, F.3 and F.5; but with regard to sections D.2, E.1 and G.2, directed raising the marks to “E” rather than “F.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2008. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB),...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11957 14
In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB. 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 | NR838 14
provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that her naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 17 July 2009 with her rebuttal dated 21 July 2009 (copies at Tab A). Pursuant to the Board's regulations, the Board determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10695 14
DErARIMWEMN! Ur the RAY T PAAR PARP FRM PFr Ee TION Ae NAN Se preompr 701 5, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100i ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Dear Master ‘