Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7556 14
Original file (NR7556 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

GARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECOR
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON. VA 22204-2490

>

TUR

Docket No: 7556-14/
1539-13

12 December 2014

 

 

This is in reference to your reconsideration request dated 4 June
2014. You previously petitioned the Board and were advised in
our letter of 5 June 2013, 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 9 December 2014. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your
application and any material submitted in support of your
application. In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, Military
Personnel Law Branch dated 28 August 2014, a copy of which is
attached.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board determined that the audio recording and your
assertion of being improperly and illegally “rushed” to accept
nonjudicial punishment, even though not previously considered by
the Board, were insufficient to establish the existence of -
material error or injustice. The Board determined that this
audio recording was not enough to outweigh the significant
misconduct you committed while serving on active duty. Further,
the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in
the advisory opinion. Accordingly, your application has been
denied.

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 records. 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.

Sincerely,

 

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

 

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10592 14

    Original file (NR10592 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 4 December 2014. 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 | 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 | NR4896 14

    Original file (NR4896 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 4 December 2014. 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 | NR4449 14

    Original file (NR4449 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 4 December 2014. 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 | NR9942 14

    Original file (NR9942 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. 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 | NR4121 14

    Original file (NR4121 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 4 December 2014. 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 | NR5450 14

    Original file (NR5450 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 4 December 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Docket No.NRO5450-14 on of an official Consequently, when applying for a correcti to demonstrate the naval record, the burden is on the applicant existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5588 14

    Original file (NR5588 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the Board considered your response dated 20 Nov 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. 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 | NR4002 14

    Original file (NR4002 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. 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 | NR9529 14

    Original file (NR9529 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 4 December 2014. 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.