Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6493 14
Original file (NR6493 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

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

 

BAN
Docket No.NRO06493-14
12 January 2015

This is in reference to 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 consisted
of 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 Headquarters Marine Corps
(HOMC) memo 1000 RAP, a copy of which was provided to you on 9
December 2014, and is being provided to you now. In addition,
the Board considered your response to the A/O dated 18 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.NR064393-14

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 Director

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6486 14

    Original file (NR6486 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.

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | NR2338 14

    Original file (NR2338 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 March 2015. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 16 July and 4 December 2014, copies of which are attached. 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 | 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.