DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
: ee 2 NAVY ANNEX
Cee” WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No. 1974-11
21. Rpral 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 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. 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 15 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 comments
contained in the report of the PERB. Specifically regarding the
contested fitness report for 13 June 2009 to 16 March 2010, the Board
noted that a reporting senior's observation need not be direct. In
view of the above, 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
ig on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material
‘ error or injustice.
Sincerely,
WW Yoo
W. DEAN PFEIF
f Executive Dir Oo
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01981-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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 statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying fora correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09121-11
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 found it was during the period of the contested fitness report that you received a formal counseling for your conduct before that period, as mentioned in section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”) of the report. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
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 | CY2011 | 06711-11
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 | CY2009 | 08554-09
The Board further concurred with the advisory opinion in = concluding your selection by the FY 2010 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board would have been definitely unlikely, even if your record had not included the fitness report CMC has directed removing. request, a Although the Board voted not to modify the fitness report for i July 2005 to 21 June 2006, you may submit the RS’s letter and the RO’s endorsement to future selection boards. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12425-10
You now request that the report for 2 October 1980 to 31 January 1981 be modified by addition of the reporting senior’s (RS’s) undated letter, and you again request removing the other two reports. 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, and the Board’s file on your prior case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
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...
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 | CY2012 | 08548 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2012. 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 | CY2009 | 09555-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested fitness report for 25 November 2002 to 29 May 2003. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. 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.