DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 00213-10
3 April 2010
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 i April 2010. 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 and applicable statutes, regulations and
policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 18
February 2010 with attachments, a copy of which is attached.
The Board also considered your memorandum for the record dated 8
March 2010 with enclosure.
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.
The Board did recognize that the "Member Trait Average" of
"4.50" in block 45, appearing in both the contested fitness
report and the version you want filed in its place, was
inconsistent with the marks assigned in the report at issue, but
consistent with those in the proposed replacement report.
However, without input from the reporting senior, the Board was
unable to determine whether the marks he intended to assign you
were those reflected in the contested report or those in the
replacement report. 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,
t
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di
Enclosure:
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 12554 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 2013. of this 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 | CY1999 | Document scanned on Mon Sep 25 09_16_10 CDT 2000
You requested replacement of the “2.8” mark in “military appearance” in your enlisted performance evaluation report ending 16 April 1967. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 1999. A review of the member’s record revealed the member was an E—4 at the time of the report.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03701-11
The Board also considered your counsel’s letters dated 11 November 2010 and 22 April 2011 with enclosure. Since the Board still found no defect in your fitness report record, it had no basis to recommend your advancement to either pay grade E-8 or E-9,. In view of the above, the Board again voted to deny relief.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02224-10
the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report by removing, from the section K.4 (reviewing officer’s comments) Addendum Page, “Future assignments for [you] should be in positions were [sic] [you] can be closely supervised and compete with [your] contemporaries within [your] MOS [military occupational specialty] .” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 2010. Documentary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00874-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 5 March 2010, 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 | CY2014 | NR5198 14
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 | CY2010 | 08027-10
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “SECT[ion] A, Item 5a- MRO [Marine reported on] was assigned to the BCP [Body Composition Program] during this reporting period for being outside of Marine Corps physical fitness and weight standards. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08435-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 10 September 2010, 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 | 01269-08
The reporting period for this fitness report is April 1, 2004 to July 23, 2004. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 March 2008. 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 | 02666-00
In addition, the Board considered the advisory applicable statutes, regulations opinion furnished by the Navy 2oo0, a copy of which is Personnel Command dated 19 June attached. ” c. The reporting senior has submitted, and we have accepted and filed the supplemental report. The fact that the revision is a better report should have no bearing on whether the original is retained or removed: W e make provisions for the submission of supplementary material concerning fitness reports so that the...