Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12193-10
Original file (12193-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BJG
Docket No: 12193 -1.0
3 February 2011

 

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, began deliberations on
21 January 2011 and completed its review of your application on
3 February 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
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 21 October 2010, and the memorandum from
the Chairperson, PERB, dated 13 December 2010, copies of which

are 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 and the memorandum from the Chairperson.
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,

; Ls ead
Executive or

Enclosures

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2010 | 12186-10

    Original file (12186-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 09507-10

    Original file (09507-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 12875-10

    Original file (12875-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in. 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00084-12

    Original file (00084-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the report for 1 January to 12 May 2009 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “Upon completion of his scheduled PME [Professional Military Education] .” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2012. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12849-10

    Original file (12849-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2011 | 06711-11

    Original file (06711-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested report for 17 dune 2009 to 7 January 2010. , A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 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. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12829-10

    Original file (12829-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2011. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB, except to not you did not request completely removing section K (RO’s marks and comments) of the reports in question. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12844-10

    Original file (12844-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 09836-10

    Original file (09836-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 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 offLeLal naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...