Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6486 14
Original file (NR6486 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BUAKD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490

BAN
Docket No.NR06486-14
13 January 2015

This is in reference tq your application for correction to your

naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 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 12 January 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 ccnsisted
ef your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. The Board also considered the
advisory opinion (A/O) furnished by the Office of the Chief of
Naval Operations memo 7220 Ser N130D/14U1525 of 14 Nov 2014, a
copy of which was provided to you on 17 November 2014, and is
being provided to you now. Additionally, the Board considered
your response to the A/O dated 8 December 2014.

However, 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
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
Accordingly, your application for your request 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
Docket No.NR06486-14

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. ONEILL
Executive Directcr

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5126 14

    Original file (NR5126 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 December 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Docket No.NRO5S126-14 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 | NR2990 14

    Original file (NR2990 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 February 2015. 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. 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 | NR4936 14

    Original file (NR4936 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. NR4936-14 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 | NR8208 14

    Original file (NR8208 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You again requested removal of the fitness report for 3 June to 2 September 2011. In your previous case, docket number 1076-12, this ~equest was denied on 26 April 2012. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board's file on your previous case, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies..

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11241 14

    Original file (NR11241 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 29 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 | NR5087 14

    Original file (NR5087 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 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 | NR9152 14

    Original file (NR9152 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested completely removing the fitness report for 5 April to 30 November 2007, and you impliedly requested removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 20615 Major Selection Board. In this regard, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion in finding your selection by the FY 2015 promotion board would have been definitely unlikely, even if your record had reflected the modifications CMC has directed to the fitness report at issue. Consequently, when:...

  • 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 | NR5549 14

    Original file (NR5549 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.NRO5549-14 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.