Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06867-10
Original file (06867-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

JSR
Docket No: 6867-10
30 September 2010

 

i — = ensue a

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 30 September 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, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the
advisory opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 22 July
2010, 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 advisory opinion.

The Board noted that the investigating officer’s recommendation
was that you receive “At a minimum” a nonpunitive letter of
reprimand and verbal counseling, and the Board further noted
that this recommendation was not binding on the command. The
Board found that the contested counseling entry was adequately
clear and that it did not hold you accountable for another
Marine’s failings. The Board found the entry’s not having been
mentioned in your “not observed” fitness report for 5 May to 6
July 2007 did not invalidate it. Finally, the Board observed
that the issuance of the contested entry did not constitute
disciplinary action, so the Electronic Key Management System
directive you cited concerning such action was inapplicable.

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,

Noss |
W. DEAN PF R
Executive chor

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09823-10

    Original file (09823-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested reports for 11 March to 15 July 2009 and 1 August to 30 September 2009; and modifying the report for 1 October 2008 to 10 March 2009 by removing the mark in section A, item 6.c (“Disciplinary Action”) and removing, from the third sighting officer’s comments, “SNM [Subject named Marine] has been the subject of numerous Human Factor Boards and Stan [standardization] Boards; all recommendations from...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06300-10

    Original file (06300-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2010. 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 | CY2010 | 05461-10

    Original file (05461-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 July 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. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 13 May 2010, a copy of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07624-09

    Original file (07624-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2008 | 01143-08

    Original file (01143-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 July 2008. The Board found the absence, from your fitness report for 4 December 2004 to 4 April 2005 (not on file in your record), of any reference to the counseling entry in question or the matter it addresses does not establish you had no behavior warranting formal counseling. The Board found the contested counseling entry was not a Marine Corps Separation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02224-10

    Original file (02224-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2011 | 01974-11

    Original file (01974-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that the fitness report for 13 June 2009 to 16 March 2010 be removed and that the report for 17 March to 30 June 2010 be removed or modified to make it “not observed.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07166-01

    Original file (07166-01.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removal of the contested fitness report for 1 January to 2 February 1996. The Board also considered your rebuttal letter dated 30 July 2002 with enclosures.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 concluding that no further correction to your fitness report record...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5059 13

    Original file (NR5059 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By letter of 11 April 2013, you requested removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) entry dated 15 September 2008. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 October 2013. 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 | CY2010 | 09121-11

    Original file (09121-11.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. The Board found it was during the period of the contested fitness report that you received a formal counseling for your conduct before that period, as mentioned in section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”) of the report. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...