DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 .
JSR
Docket No. 03711-09
1 October 2009
This is in reference to your letter dated 19 March 2009 with
enclosures, seeking reconsideration of your previous application
for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions
of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552. Your
previous case, docket number 05981-08, was denied on 14 August
2008.
A three-member panel of the: Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on
1 October 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
letter, together with ail material submitted in support. thereof,
the Board's file on your prior case, 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 30 July 2009,
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 PERE.
Accordingly, the Board again voted to deny relief. 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,
\oN oad
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Dir
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00822-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 22 October 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations dated 1 June 2009 and the Navy Personnel Command dated 17 June and 9 July 2009, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04049-09
Your previous case, docket number 08315-08, was denied on 14 October 2008. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 17 December 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 | 00034-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 30 April 2009. The Board also considered your letters dated 9 and 13 April 2009. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09966-08
panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 2009. in addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (N134) dated 3 April 2009, the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) (PERS-32) dated 7 May 2009, NPC (PERS-007) dated 10 June 2009 with enclosure and Nec (PERS-80) dated 7 October 2009, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07624-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 19 February 2010. The Board found the removal of that entry from your record did not completely invalidate the contested fitness report, which has been modified by removing all reference to the entry. In this regard, the report as it now appears in your Official Military Personnel File properly reflects all the corrections directed by the report of the PERB dated 22...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07641-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board’s file on your previous case, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05336-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2011. Since the Board found insufficient basis to remove or modify the page 11 entry, and you have provided no other new and Material evidence or other matter regarding the previously contested fitness report, the Board had no grounds to remove or modify the report. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10720-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 13 January 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 28 October 2010, a copy of whichis 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 inj ustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10444-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 January 2009. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion and the report of the PERB, except to note your letter of 12 November 2008 did provide an earlier version, dated 20 September 2006, of the contested fitness report dated 22 September 2006, showing a mark of “Cc” (fifth best of seven possible)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08633-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 3 September 2009. Further, the Board noted that the modification of this report directed by PERB in your previous case was implemented on 7 August 2007, before the FY 2009 Lieutenant Colonel. 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.