r correction of your
jon fo
to your applicat
ns of title 10 of the
t to the provisio
section 1552.
: . : XN
This is in reference
naval record pursuan
United States code,
el] of: the Board for Correction oO
n executive session, considered your
Your allegations of error and
application on 2 March 2015.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
reguiations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
of your application, together wi iat submitted in
nz three-member pan
Records, sitting i
th all materi
licable statutes,
support =hereot, your naval record and appl
regulations ang policies. if adgicion, the Boars nonsideres The
Waring Corpse periormance Evzeluelior
wepsre o= “ene Heacguerst-
Review Board (PERE), dated zo Augus- 2614, 8 TOpyY of wrick i5
attached.
a found that the ev
lish the existence of probable material
insufficient to estab
error or injustice. Jn this connection, the Board substantially
curred with the co ‘ned in the report of the PERB.
The supporting statements “you provided did not. persuade the
Board that the contested fitness report was not a fair and
accurate evaluation of your performance. in this regard, the
Board observed that you do not object to the reviewing officer
portion of the report at issue, where your comparison with peers
js reflected. Further, the Board particularly noted that you
ing senior
have provided nothing showing that either the reporti
or the reviewing officer has acknowledged that the two-tiered
evaluation system, to which you and the statement dated 1 May
—
a he all ee
2014 from Captain i -, USMC refer, was applied in
preparing your fitness report. Since the Board found
insufficient basis to correct your fitness report record, it had
no grounds to remove either of your failures of selection by the
Fiscal Year 2015 and 2016 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards.
In view of the above, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be turnished
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
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. O'NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure
A
ee A SE
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12997 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 2015. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6179 14
This request was denied on 30 September 2013. #, three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 22 January 2015. 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 | CY2013 | NR8499 13
You requested removing the fitness report for 14 February to 10 June 2011 and your two rebuttals, each dated 8 June 2011, to the service record page 11 ("Administrative Remarks (1070)") entries dated 25 May and 1 June 2011, respectively. Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2015. Since the Board found insufficient grounds to remove either of your failures of selection for promotion, it had...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9152 14
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 | NR11670 14
Bb 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 | CY2006 | 06177-06
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. Subsequently he petitioned the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) to modify CD report 19901101 to 19901221, CH report 19901222 to 19910327, CH report 19910823 to 19920510 and TR report 19920511 to 19920816 and to remove his failure’of selection. The PERB concluded that the petitioned...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9948 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 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 | NR2990 14
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 | NR9778 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. 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 | NR9421 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 December 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in t support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board {(PERB), dated 8 August...