DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY aI
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No. 08184-10
30 September 2010
This is in reference to your application dated 6 March 2009, 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
05157-09, was denied on 17 December 2009.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case 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 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. In addition, the Board considered the
report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB), dated 29 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 report of the PERB. Accordingly, the Board again
voted to deny relief. 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,
W. DE P
R
Executive Qitector
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 | CY2010 | 09308-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 16 September 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your current application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board's files on your prior cases (docket numbers 07213-07 and 08633-09), your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06961-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 2 June 2011. 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. Consequently, when ‘applying.for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02693-10
You requested reconsideration of your previous application, docket number 9307-08, to modify the fitness report for 1 to 8 January 2007 by removing or amending the section I (reporting senior’s ‘Directed and Additional Comments”) comment “using his government cell phone to contact a woman, who was not his ‘spouse, on multiple occasions in a social manner.” This application was denied on 27 January 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07624-09
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 | CY2009 | 09383-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2010. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 28 December 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 | CY2009 | 09932-09
These requests were denied on 2 September 2004. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion from the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Career Management Team (CMT), dated 24 July 2008 with enclosures, and the reports of the HQMC Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 September 2008 and 8 September 2009, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12147-09
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 16 November 2009, a copy of which is attached. The petitioner argues that this fitness report should be removed from his Official Military Personnei File (OMPF) because the Reporting Senior marks are lower than those of his previous report from the same Reporting Senior, and that he was not counseled about the reduced marks. Each report is an evaluation of the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7159 13
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 1 October 2008 to 30 September 2009 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “upon completion of billet level MOS [Military Occupational Specialty] school”. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09823-10
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...