Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09333-10
Original file (09333-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

JSR
Docket No: 9333-10
21 October 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.

You requested completely removing the fitness report for 21 June
to 20 December 2004.

It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has
directed modifying the contested report by removing the entire
section K (reviewing officer's marks and comments) .

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 21 October 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
report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB), dated 16 August 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, your application for relief beyond that effected by
CMC 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,

 
  
 

W. DEAN P
Executive Di tor

 

 

 

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7159 13

    Original file (NR7159 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2012 | 06644 12

    Original file (06644 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SNM [Subject Named Marine] received a Letter of Appreciation and Certificate of Appreciation during the reporting period.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2012. The Board also considered the reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 6 April and 19 June 2012, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11428-10

    Original file (11428-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested modifying the fitness report for 1 October 2009 to 28 January 2010 by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's comments), the comment “SNM [subject named Marine] does not possess the mental dexterity required to lead Marines in extremely challenging environments.” In the alternative, you requested completely removing the contested report. CMC further directed removing, from page 2 of your statement dated 20 February 2010, the following: “I do possess the mental...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11418-09

    Original file (11418-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 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, In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12296-09

    Original file (12296-09.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 this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB, except the Board was persuaded that the reporting senior’s portion of the original version of a superseded version of the contested fitness report for 3 October 2007 to 30 September...

  • 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 | CY2009 | 12295-09

    Original file (12295-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report by removing the mark from section A, item 6.b (“Marine Subject Of: Derogatory Material”); removing, from section I (RS’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “Derogatory: Directed Comment, Sect[ion] A, Item 6b: MRO [Marine reported on] has a page ll entry for being arrested and conduct not in keeping with standards expected for an NCO [noncommissioned officer].”; and removing, from your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03390-10

    Original file (03390-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report by removing, from section C (“Billet Accomplishments”), “below the national average of 24 Marines and an average of 4.0.” and removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “relieved for cause and.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 July 2010. Documentary...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5206 14

    Original file (NR5206 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2014. in addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 21 April 2014, 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 | 12181-09

    Original file (12181-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Specifically, cmc has directed removing, from section I (reporting senior's “Directed and Additional Comments”), “Directed Comment, Sect [ion] A, 8F: MRO [Marine reported on] was assigned to the Body Composition Program (BCP) during this reporting period.” and from section K.4 (reviewing officer’s comments), “due to her assignment to BCP.” By electronic mail dated 10 March 2010, a copy of which is attached, the staff of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) advised Headquarters...