Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5667 14
Original file (NR5667 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
TOP THE NAVY

Pt fp rusk F

ROARM FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 & COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490

BAN
Docket No:NRO5667-14
1° November 2014

 

This ig in reply to your request for reconsideration on 4
September 2014. A review of our files reveals that in June
2012, you petitioned this Board seeking to.change your “partial
year” with 243 points, and that it be made a “satisfactory

year".

On 14 January 2013, your case was presented to the Board and it
was disapproved. on 4 September 2014, you have requested a
reconsideration of your case.

As explained in the Board’s previous denial letter, a case may
only be reconsidered upon submission of new and material
evidence. New evidence is defined as evidence not previously
considered by the Board and not reasonably available to you at
the time of your previous application. Evidence is considered
to be material if it is likely to have a substantial effect on
the outcome of the Board’s decision.

on 5 November 2014, your reconsideration request to be heard
before the Board was approved. Therefore, a three-member panel
of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in
executive session, considered your reconsideration 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
navai record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
Tn addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished
by Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) memo 1800 MMSR-5 of 8 Aug
2014, a copy of which was provided to you on 29 August 2014, and
is being provided to you now, see enclosure.

However, after careful and conscientious consideration of the
entire record, the Board found that the evidence you submitted
was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
Docket No.NRO5667-14

error or injustice. In taking this determination, the Boara
still concurred with the comments contained in the original
advisory opinion. The names and votes of the members of the

panei will be furnished upon request.

Tt ig regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
VOLS ble action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have

en ee Se
LH TAVOD re Che ieee tmmenn

whe Board reconsider .its decision upon submission of new
evidence within one wear 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
Eeecutive Director

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8308 14

    Original file (NR8308 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, you allege that you did not receive a copy of the partially favorable advisory opinion (2/0), since you did not agree with the approval dates. As explained in the Board’s previous partial approval letter, a case may only be reconsidered upon submission of new and material evidence. On 14 July 2014, your reconsideration request was approved.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9645 14

    Original file (NR9645 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on il September 2014. Your counsel, citing DOD Instruction 1320.04, dated 3 January 2014, relied on Enclosure 4, paragraph 1.a(1)(b)2, which referred to information that “Did not result in more than a non-punitive rehabilitative counseling administered by a superior to a subordinate.” He contended that this language, which does not appear in DOD Instruction 1320.4,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6075 14

    Original file (NR6075 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Evidence is considered to be material if it is likely to have a substantial effect on the outcome of the Board’s decision, On 16 April 2014, our office received your reconsideration request dated 9 April 2014, requesting a reconsideration of your case based on new and material information you provided (a response to the original advisory opinion). Therefore, a three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5361 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR5361 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your current request has been carefully examined by a three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 8 October 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, any material submitted in support of your application, and prior case Eile. After careful and conscientious consideration of the enti record, the Board determined the letter from the Depart Veterans Affairs stating you are being treated for s...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4162 14

    Original file (NR4162 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 5 November 2014. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR13160 14

    Original file (NR13160 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Sincerely, ROBERT J. O'NEILL Executive Director DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S, COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490 BAN Docket No.NROQ6157-14 19 Taswitoass OAT aa A eve This ig in reference to your application for correction to your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 United States Code, section 1552. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5235 14

    Original file (NR5235 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your reconsideration request on 28 April 2014. Although the information you provided was new, it was not material information that would change the Board's original decision and your reconsideration request has been denied. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4749 14

    Original file (NR4749 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your reconsideration request on 28 April’ 2014. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by Docket No.NR04749-14 the Board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4148 14

    Original file (NR4148 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your reconsideration request on 14 April 2014. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by Docket No.NRO04148-14 the Board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3580 14

    Original file (NR3580 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your reconsideration request on 14 April 2014. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by Docket No.NRO03580-14 the Board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...