Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6102 14
Original file (NR6102 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

7Oo1 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2480

 

HD

Docket No: NR6102-14
926 Mareh 2O15

 

‘Dear Staff Sergean iii

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 26 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

opinions from Headcuarters Marine Corps (HOMC) dated

6 November and 18 December 2014, copies of which are attached.
The Board also considered a copy of your fitness report for

1 January to 13 February 2012, whose removal was directed by the
HOMC Performance Evaluation Review Board, and the HOMC e-mail
Gated 7 October 2014 (the basis for the PERB action), a copy of
which is also 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 opinions.
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 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’NEILL
Executive Director

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11369 14

    Original file (NR11369 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The page 11 entry was not considered, as the attached e-mail dated 28 October 2014 from Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) shows that neither the entry nor your rebuttal appears in your Official Military Personnel File. A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its gecision in this case.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12003 14

    Original file (NR12003 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board also considered a COPY of your fitness report for 15 January to 2 October 2010, whose removal was directed by the HOMC Performance Evaluation Review Board, and the HOMC e-mail dated 21 November 2014 (the basis for the PERB action), a COPY of which is also attached. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3990 14

    Original file (NR3990 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 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 | NR3337 14

    Original file (NR3337 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1004 ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490 BAN Docket No.NRO3337-14 10 October 2014 This is in reference to your application for correction to your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 United States Code, section L552 A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9925 14

    Original file (NR9925 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    JSR Docket No: NR9925-14 fu November

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4717 13

    Original file (NR4717 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2014. in addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Boarg (PERB) dated 17 May 2013, the e-mail from HOMC dated 18 July 2013, and the advisory opinions furnished by HOMC dated 18 February 2014 with attachment (MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, Subject: Promotion Recommendation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3788 13

    Original file (NR3788 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, his naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1288 14

    Original file (NR1288 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive gession, considered your application. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your navai 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 material error or...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9149 14

    Original file (NR9149 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Tt is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested fitness report for 1 July 2010 to-16 May 2011. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 October 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, In...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7884 14

    Original file (NR7884 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on § January 2015. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board dated 18 June 2014, the e-mail from HOMC dated 7 July 2014, and the advisory opinions from HOMC dated 2 September and 6 October 2014, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...