DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX JSR
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No. 06961-10
2 June 2011
This is in reference to your application dated 15 May 2010, 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
03789-09, was denied on 11 June 2009. You again requested removing
the fitness reports for 15 March to 30 June 2005 and 30 September
to 15 November 2005.
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has directed
removing the contested report for 15 March to 30 June 2005.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 2 June 2011.
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 current application, together with all
material submitted in support thereof, the Board's file en 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 4 April 2011, 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 PERB. Accordingly, the Board again
voted to deny relief regarding the remaining contested fitness
report. 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,
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00431-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 31 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your current application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board's file on your prior 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 | CY2010 | 06266-10
Your previous request, docket number 12841-09, again seeking to remove the original fitness report and replace it with the revised report, or just remove the original report, and remove your failures of selection to lieutenant colonel, which then included failures of selection by the FY 2005 and 2006 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards, was administratively closed on 25 May 2010. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 8556-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 October 2008. 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, and your prior case file. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08556-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 October 2008. 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, and your prior case file. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1703 14
In your previous case, docket number 10449-08, the Board denied this relief on 23 January 2009. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 10 April 2014. 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 | CY2011 | 06608-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 December 2011. 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 | CY2011 | 04143-11
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 did not find persuasive the reporting senior’s letter Of 30 August 2010, recommending that the contested fitness report be removed as he did not believe that you rated an adverse report. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02719-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100BJGDocket No:2719-0725 June 2007This is in reference to your letter dated 14 March 2007 with enclosures requesting correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.You requested that the fitness report for 17 August to 31 December 2004 be modified by changing section I (reporting senior (RS) comments) to reflect “Promote at soonest...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08069-02
In your current application, you again request removing the original report, but you also add a new request to replace it with a revised report the reporting senior has submitted for the pertinent period. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report. Nothing has been furnished with reference (a) that documents any factual errors associated with the fitness report - Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON...