DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 9482-10
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.
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 23 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 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 Boned
Executive Dir
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09507-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB, except to note that the reporting senior's statement that “[your] RV [relative value] is not a reflection of [your] outstanding performance” appears in his letters of 7 April 2010 to the President of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Lieutenant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12193-10
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09499-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB, noting that the reviewing officer (RO) did not enter a mark in section K.2 indicating concurrence with the adverse evaluation the reporting senior (RS) had submitted, which would have triggered the requirement to afford you a chance to reply...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09333-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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. 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 | 12186-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 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 | CY2010 | 09484-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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. 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 | 11189-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 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. 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 | 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 | CY2014 | NR10588 14
The Board found it an immaterial error that the corrected ending date of the first report at issue and the corrected beginning date of the second report are the same date. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. 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 | 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...