DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 7001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490
BAN
Docket No:NR06075-14
20 June 2014
This is in reply to your application for reconsideration in
April 2014 with enclosures, in which you submitted a response to
the original unfavorable advisory opinion.
A review of our files reveals that in December 2013, you
petitioned this Board seeking a back dated promotion to pay
grades E-6/SSGT and E-7/GYSGT in CY 2003 and F¥Y 2008. On 14
April 2014, after careful consideration of your request, the
Board found insufficient evidence of an error or injustice that
would warrant the relief you sought. On that same day, you were
sent a letter stating that your case was denied.
As explained in the Board’s letter of 14 April 2014, 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 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 reconsideration
request on 18 June 2014. 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
original advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps
(HOMC) memo 1400/3 MMPR-2 of 26 Feb 2014, a copy of which was
provided to you on 13 March 2014, and is now enclosed, and your
reconsideration request, which included your response to the
original advisory opinion.
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 making this determination, the Board
still concurred with the comments contained in the advisory
opinion. Therefore, 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.
Sincerely,
ROBERT D. 4SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3976 14
However, in light your highly decorated award (Silver Star), your case was presented to the Board out of respect for your exceptional service to our country. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2014, Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Accordingly, your application...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5667 14
on 4 September 2014, you have requested a reconsideration of your case. 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 | NR8308 14
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 | CY2013 | NR9513 13
* However, as explained in the Board’s previous letter, a case may only be reconsidered upon submission of new and material evidence. Evidence is considered to be material if |.t is likely to have a substantial effect on the outcome of the Board's decision. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) meme 1070 JB Gf 72 Aug 2014, & COPY of which is being provided to you, see enclosure (25) « 1 tn 1983, you had been selected to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7556 14
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 9 December 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application and any material submitted in support of your application. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5235 14
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 | NR5680 14
Your current request has been carefully examined by a three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, any material submitted in support of your application, and prior case file. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined the medical notes you submitted, © even though not previously considered by the Board,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4749 14
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 | CY2013 | NR8289 13
Evidence is considered to be material if it is likely to have a substantial effect on the outcome of the prior Board's decision. The Board was not persuaded by the following issues, your counsel presented: 1) that it was unreasonable for Petitioner to respond to an advisory opinion (A/O) by the SBP Manager that was not fully formed, 2) that Petitioner should not have to agree to pay an undetermined amount of money prior to the Board's decision, and 3) that.there is a lack of an opinion from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3580 14
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...