Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10425-09
Original file (10425-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON BC 20370-5100

HD:hd .
Docket No. 10425-09
12 December 2009

 

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. You requested, in effect,
that the enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 March
2008 to 5 March 2009 be modified by raising the mark in block 45
("Promotion Recommendation - Individual") from "Must Promote"
(second best of five possible marks) to "Early" (best).

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 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, applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished
by the Navy Personnel Command dated 23 October 2009, a copy of

which is attached. The Board also considered your letter dated
9 November 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 advisory opinion.

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
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,

\Sdans

W. DEAN P
Executive ector

   

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08069-08

    Original file (08069-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You further requested reconsideration for retention in the Navy. It is noted that the Navy Personnel Command (NPC) corrected the PSR as you requested, in August 2008. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2009.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00587-09

    Original file (00587-09.PDF) Auto-classification: Denied

    ™ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command (PERS-~- 311) dated 26 February 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 | CY2008 | 06447-08

    Original file (06447-08.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 advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 6 August and 2 October 2008, 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 | CY2008 | 09966-08

    Original file (09966-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2008 | 04642-08

    Original file (04642-08.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 advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 19 June 2008, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR475-13

    Original file (NR475-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the fitness report in question as you requested. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 2013. 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 warranting removal of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10720-10

    Original file (10720-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 11693-10

    Original file (11693-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You also requested that the service record page 11 counseling entry dated 21 November 2008 be modified by deleting the following: Your demonstrated lack of maturity, judgment and decision making abilities, specifically your inappropriate sexual relationship with a CPL [corporal] [pay grade E=-4}(fthen a PFC [private first class) [pay grade E-2] when it started). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02890-09

    Original file (02890-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (*“Decision Making Ability”) from “D"” to *E.” : A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ' Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2009. In addition, the Board considered the reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 March and 10 August 2009, copies of which are attached, your letter of 27 March 2009 and the RS’s letter of the same date. Consequently, when applying for a correction...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08554-09

    Original file (08554-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board further concurred with the advisory opinion in = concluding your selection by the FY 2010 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board would have been definitely unlikely, even if your record had not included the fitness report CMC has directed removing. request, a Although the Board voted not to modify the fitness report for i July 2005 to 21 June 2006, you may submit the RS’s letter and the RO’s endorsement to future selection boards. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...