DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BIG
Docket Ne: 5164-09
18 December 2009
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of titie 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 17 December 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 Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 7 May 2009,
a copy of which is attached. The Board also considered the
statement on your behalf from Major E. M. M---, United States
Marine Corps (Retired), dated 30 March 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. In this connection, the Board
substantially concurred with the comments contained in the
report of the PERB. The supporting statements you provided did
not persuade the Board you were unfairly or inaccurately
evaluated. 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 Den!
W. DEAN PFEIHFE
Executive Direct
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12153-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2010. 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 | CY2008 | 11610-08
You are entitled to have ° 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. 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 | 11372-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the uncontested report for 16 January to 24 February 2006. 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 | CY2009 | 05157-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 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 the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02046-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 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 | CY2009 | 09809-09
You further requested that these reports, as well as the report for 31 October 2007 to 30 June 2008, be modified by adding, to section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “MRO [Marine reported on] meets Physical Evaluation criteria in MCO [Marine Corps Order] 6100.12, and is within standards.” Finally, you requested removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year 2010 Active Reserve Colonel Selection Board, and granting you special selection board consideration...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08268-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the report for 10 July to 2 December 1999 by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's comments) , “given limited tasks and direct guidance.” and “but requires. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official: naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03846-07
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 24 April 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 | CY2008 | 01749-08
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the report ending 31 December 2001 and modifying the report ending 6 July 2004 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), all the material to which you objected: “With guidance”; “Adequately” and “Overall, I rate him 6 of 6 Captains [sic] in the Battalion. [sic].” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13064-09
You requested completely removing the fitness report for 6 December 2008 to 14 May 2009. It ig noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's comments), “Maturity and staff . 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.