Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7363 14
Original file (NR7363 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 5S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

HD
Docket No: NR7363-14
SN Awe) INIAGE

we 44peee Seen

 

Dear Gunnery Sergeant <

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09105-08

    Original file (09105-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the decision of the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB) dated 6 August 2007, a copy of which is 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. 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 | NR4293 14

    Original file (NR4293 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) entry dated 23 October 2013 and your undated rebuttal. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09366-08

    Original file (09366-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 December 2008. In this regard, the Board did not find the statements at enclosures (4) through (7) of your letter dated 10 December 2008 to be persuasive. 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 | NR4701 14

    Original file (NR4701 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with All material submitted in support thereof and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 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 | NR6088 14

    Original file (NR6088 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. 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 | NR9151 14

    Original file (NR9151 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 20 November 2014. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 1 August 2014, and the advisory opinion from HOQMC dated 8 September 2014, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4263 14

    Original file (NR4263 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by NPC dated 26 September 2014 with enclosure and 17 October 2014, copies of which are 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 demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11992-08

    Original file (11992-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 2009. 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. 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 | CY2009 | 06799-09

    Original file (06799-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 22 October 2009. The Board found it sufficient that you were afforded a chance to respond to the Hotline Completion Report of 2 April 2008 before you were removed from the promotion list. 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 | CY2008 | 07725-08

    Original file (07725-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You may submit to NPC a statement, for inclusion in your record with the contested material, in rebuttal to the Memorandum for PERS-48; or you may ask NPC to redact the statement, in the Memorandum for PERS-48, that you consider erroneous, citing the applicable findings of the investigation. Finally, regardless of whether you are correct that no adverse material was filed in the record of the other officer whose conduct was investigated, the Board was unable to find any error or injustice...