Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9926 14
Original file (NR9926 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
mere wee BO RT ee el ee

VOT AI Liven $ ME tran iw tf

RoARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAE RECORDS
704 5. COURT 1\OUSE RGAD SLITE 1695

 

JSR
Docket No: NR9926-14
b Movember 2014

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the
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 6 November 2014. Your allegations of error and
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 with all material submitted in
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the
report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB), dated 20 August 2014, a Copy of which is

attached.

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 initustice. In this comnection, the Board substantiaily
concurred with the comments contained tn the report of the PERE.
The Board did not condone the late submission of the contested
Fitness report, 56 days after the reporting period, but was
unable to find this invalidated it. In view of the above, your.
application 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
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 anplicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material

Re Ce te a a ee tee a, ~~ Ge DGD -ate _

error or injustice.

Sincerely,

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10584 14

    Original file (NR10584 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR 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 oF injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5506 14

    Original file (NR5506 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. In addition, the Board considered the reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 28 April and 23 September 2014, copies of which are attached, and your letter dated 8 May 2014. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9950 14

    Original file (NR9950 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 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 démonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4254 14

    Original file (NR4254 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. Consequently, when appiying 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 | NR9956 14

    Original file (NR9956 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 13 November 2014. 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10589 14

    Original file (NR10589 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Orr THE WAVY F Ee : CORRECTION OF NAVAL RE CORDS uu INGTON, VA 22204-2420 JSR Docket No: NR10589-14 4 Decemper 2014 Dear Colonel ee * : This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section L552 » You requested % that the fitness report for 7 December 2009 to 21 July 2010 be modified by removing the entire section K (reviewing officer’s (RO’S) marks and comments) . New evidence is evidence not...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10695 14

    Original file (NR10695 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DErARIMWEMN! Ur the RAY T PAAR PARP FRM PFr Ee TION Ae NAN Se preompr 701 5, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100i ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Dear Master ‘

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9364 14

    Original file (NR9364 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 8 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 record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5583 14

    Original file (NR5583 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    B three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2014. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Consequently, when applying fora 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 | NR5107 14

    Original file (NR5107 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. In addition, the Board considered your response to the advisory opinion dated 7 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...