Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10526-07
Original file (10526-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 10526-07

31 January 2008

 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your

application on 31 January 2008. 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 and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. [In addition, the Board considered the
report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB), dated 19 November 2007, a copy of which is

attached.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire

, 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.
The Board found the reporting senior’s reference, in section I
(“Directed and Additional Comments”) of the contested fitness
report, to his knowledge of your performance before. your
promotion to sergeant was unobjectionable. The supporting
statements you provided, from a Marine sergeant major and
gunnery sergeant, did not persuade the Board that the contested
report was erroneous or unjust. 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 and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
the Board. 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,

Lo

Executive Dir

  

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5304 14

    Original file (NR5304 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 1 July to 31 December 2008 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “I rank him 6 of 6 Staff Sergeants in the NROTC [Naval Reserve Officers’ Training Corps] program.” and further directed modifying the report for 1 January to 7 August 2009 by removing, from section I, “Promote behind peers. I rank him 6 of 6 Staff Sergeants in the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5208 14

    Original file (NR5208 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 1 January to 2 June 2008 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s ‘Directed and Additional Comments”), “not letting past mistakes bring him or his work down.” R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5301 14

    Original file (NR5301 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested completely removing the fitness reports for 21 June to 31 December 2008 and 1 January to 8 May 2009. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 9 April 2014, a copy of which is attached. 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 | CY2009 | 12296-09

    Original file (12296-09.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 this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB, except the Board was persuaded that the reporting senior’s portion of the original version of a superseded version of the contested fitness report for 3 October 2007 to 30 September...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06583-08

    Original file (06583-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 July 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board found the reviewing officer took timely action on the contested fitness report, signing it on 22 July 2003. He notes procedural errors in the completion and submission of this...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5198 14

    Original file (NR5198 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested removing the fitness reports for 1 January to 25 June 2007, 11 July to 31 December 2009 and 19 May to 31 December 2010. It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 1 January to 25 June 2007 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “MRO [Marine reported on] is assigned to the Body Composition Program.” and “SECT[ion] A, Item 5a: MRO is currently assigned to the Body...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5184 14

    Original file (NR5184 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 1 July to 12 December 2008 by changing the date in section A, item 3.b (beginning date) from *20080701" to “20081002” {and filing in your record an administrative filler for 1 July to 1 October 2008} and modifying the report for 13 December 2008 to 19 May 2009 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed ana Additional Comments”), all but the first sentence and in section K...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10533-07

    Original file (10533-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5100 JSRDocket No. 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 reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 16 and 19 November 2007 and 15 January 2008,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 8556-07

    Original file (8556-07.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 2008. 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, and your prior case file. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08556-07

    Original file (08556-07.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 2008. 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, and your prior case file. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...