Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2015 | NR2108 15
Original file (NR2108 15.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 5. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

JSR
Docket No: NR2108-15
20 April 2015

 

Dear Major —apieemt

This is in reference to your application for correction. of your .
f

naval record pursuant to the provisions ©
United States Code, gection 1552.

title 10 of the

Bh three-member ‘panel of the Board for ‘Correction of. Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 30 April 2015. Your allegations of error and

injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this

 
  

De~-ormence EVE Vie

:
(
'
I"
'
1
(

1, Tn

   

hiter careful ana conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Boara found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. 1n this connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB.
Accordingly, your application has peen 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, i
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'NETLL
Executive Director

  
 

 
 

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2015 | NR1053 15

    Original file (NR1053 15.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 3 February 2015, 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 injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10733 14

    Original file (NR10733 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 your case. NR10733-14 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 | NR4382 14

    Original file (NR4382 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 April 2015. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use. 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

    Original file (NR8499 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | NR8095 14

    Original file (NR8095 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2015. New evidence igs 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 | NR8253 14

    Original file (NR8253 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 April 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 | CY2015 | NR2103 15

    Original file (NR2103 15.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    for Correction of Naval s Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2015. in addition report of the Headquarters Marine Corps e Review Board (PERB), dated 3 March 2015, a copy of which is 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6463 14

    Original file (NR6463 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 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 exror or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9143 14

    Original file (NR9143 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 22 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 | NR6982 14

    Original file (NR6982 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 April 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...