Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9930 14
Original file (NR9930 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

wor

DOANL seuss Sn Peake eS

Foi Ss. COURTHOUSE ROALD, SUITE 10%)
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

JS
Docket No: NR9930-14

12 Novwemher 20174

 

Dear Captain Ane

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 13 November 2014. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations 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 anda

regulations and policies. In addition, the Board consid
report of the Headquarters Marine Corp Performance Eval
Review Board (PERB), dated 20 August 2014, a copy of whi
attached.

applicable statutes
n

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. In this connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB.
Accordingly, 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 cas
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are en
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission
evidence within one year from the date of the Boar

New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board

ao tr oOo
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

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 | NR9423 14

    Original file (NR9423 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 23 October 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 | NR9785 14

    Original file (NR9785 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 30 October 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 | NR5677 14

    Original file (NR5677 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. 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 | NR2716 14

    Original file (NR2716 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. 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 | NR9357 14

    Original file (NR9357 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 October 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 | NR10599 14

    Original file (NR10599 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 23 October 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 | NR9792 14

    Original file (NR9792 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, and your letter dated 15 September 2014. a conscientious consideration of the entire After careful an vidence submitted was record, the Board found that the e insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9955 14

    Original file (NR9955 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    JSR pocket No: NRg¥Y55-14 13 November 2014 y Dear Gunnery sergeant

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9419 14

    Original file (NR9419 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 23 October 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.