Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11962-08
Original file (11962-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY.

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON,DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 11962-08

(HT. MU

 

 

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 19 March 2009. 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 Fvaluation
Review Board (PERB), dated 8 December 2008, 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. 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 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

TON On OF TODULGTTCY atte 0 aL! OFLC! TEC

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,

la

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di

  
   

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12193-10

    Original file (12193-10.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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02867-09

    Original file (02867-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the report by removing the entire section K (reviewing officer’s marks and comments). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2009. 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 | 07380-09

    Original file (07380-09.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 February 2010. In addition, the Board considered the report of the HQMC PERB, dated 3 June 2009, 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 | CY2001 | 03463-01

    Original file (03463-01.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 the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 27 April 2001, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09507-10

    Original file (09507-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB, except to note that the reporting senior's statement that “[your] RV [relative value] is not a reflection of [your] outstanding performance” appears in his letters of 7 April 2010 to the President of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Lieutenant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08387-06

    Original file (08387-06.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. 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. He feels the reporting senior and reviewing officer did not have sufficient observation of his performance to warrant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04557-01

    Original file (04557-01.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 the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 1 June 2001, a copy of which is attached. met on 3 May 2001 to consider The petitioner states that the report contained in his 2 .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11264-08

    Original file (11264-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 2009. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11176-07

    Original file (11176-07.rtf) 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 the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 14 December 2007, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03870-07

    Original file (03870-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The petitioner contends the report should be removed because his rebuttal to the reporting senior’s comments are missing.3. This Headquarters located the petitioner’s rebuttal to the report and added the addendum page to his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF); therefore, the Board found the report administratively correct and procedurally complete. Finally, the Board found that the petitioner provided no substantial or justifiable information to warrant removing the report.b.