Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01941-11
Original file (01941-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BJG
Docket No: 1941-11
17 March 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.

You requested removing the fitness report for 1 to 26 January
2010.

It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has
directed modifying the contested report by changing the entry
in section A, item 3.a (*OCC foccasion]”) from “AN {annual]” to
“TR [transfer] .”

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 17 March 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. The Board also considered
the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance
Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 9 February 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 report of the PERB.
Accordingly, your request for relief beyond or other than 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 otficial
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

iti] UStice .

Sincerely,

ls }
W. DEAN PFET
Executive Di ic

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09823-10

    Original file (09823-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • 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 | 08487-10

    Original file (08487-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted im 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. Since the Board found insufficient basis to remove your failure of selection by the FY 2011...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03150-11

    Original file (03150-11.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. The Board also considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 17 March 2011, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02017-11

    Original file (02017-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested report for 24 March to 30 September 2006. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 2011. 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 | CY2014 | NR2809 14

    Original file (NR2809 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It ts noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested report for 16 April to 30 September 2011. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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 | 00762-11

    Original file (00762-11.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 addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQOMC) Performance Fvaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 12 January 2011, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4259 14

    Original file (NR4259 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ‘ Tt is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the Memorandum for the Record associated with the contested fitness report by changing the corrected ending date in section A, item 3.b (*To”) from “90110917” to 690110907"; and adding the following corrections in section A: item 1.h (*BILMOS [Billet Military Occupational Specialty) ") from *0000" to “0699,” item 2.a ("MCC {Monitored Command Code)” ) from “SND” to “SP2," item 2.b (*RUC [Reporting Unit Code]*)...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5184 14

    Original file (NR5184 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 1 July to 12 December 2008 by changing the date in section A, item 3.b (beginning date) from *20080701" to “20081002” {and filing in your record an administrative filler for 1 July to 1 October 2008} and modifying the report for 13 December 2008 to 19 May 2009 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed ana Additional Comments”), all but the first sentence and in section K...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01971-11

    Original file (01971-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested completely removing the fitness reports for 28 October 2007 to 1 March 2008 and 2 March to 2 September 2008. It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 28 October 2007 to l March 2008 by removing the entire section K (reviewing officer's marks and comments) and removing, from section I (reporting senior (RS)’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “His next assignment as a canvassing recruiter will potentially allow...