DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 7528-14/ -
10723-21
22 January 2015
This is in reference to your recent reconsideration request. You
previously petitioned the Board and were advised in our letter of
16 October 2012 that your application had been denied.
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 22 January 2015. Documentary
material considered by the Board consisted of your letter, any
Material submitted in support of your application, and your prior
case file.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board determined your letter, even though not
previously considered by the Board, was insufficient to establish
the existence of material error or injustice. The Board
determined your letter was not enough to outweigh the significant
misconduct you committed while on active duty and your
nonrecommendation for retention or reenlistment. Accordingly,
your application has been denied. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regrettable 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 and
material 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 your case. In this
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of
regularity attaches to all official record, the burden is on the
applicant to demonstrate the existence of material error or
injustice.
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11256 14
NR11256-14 22 January 2015 This is in reference to your counsel’s letter on your behalf dated 25 September 2014 with enclosures, seeking reconsideration of your previous application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552, In your previous case, docket number 9039-13, you requested reinstatement to your class and promotion to lieutenant colonel and colonel. This request was denied on 14 August 2014. , A three-member...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7271 14
You previously petitioned the Board and were advised in our letter of 24 January 2011 that your application had been denied. 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 14 January 2015. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined your letter, even though net previously considered by the Board, was insufficient to establish the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8231 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 21 January 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 | NR10560 14_Redacted
member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 23 March 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your 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 | NR6882 14
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval / record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of Docket No.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10079 14
You requested that the evaluation and counseling record for 26 September 2011 to 27 January 2012 be modified by removing, from block 41 ("Comments on Performance”), “Member received counseling for unduly familiar relationship with subordinate and appears to have corrected behavior accordingly.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considerec your application on 16 March 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10921 14
your latest reconsideration request 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 28 January 2015. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined that your assertion of post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), even though not previously considered by the Board, was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4339 14_Redacted
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 17 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your 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 | NR4339 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 17 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your 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 | NR12003 14
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...