Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04605-11
Original file (04605-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 4605-11
19 May 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 completely removing the fitness report for 1
January to 30 June 2004.

It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has
directed modifying the contested report by removing, from
section I (reporting senior'’s “Directed and Additional
Comments”), “3 of 3 Staff Sergeants within the platoon.”

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 19 May 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 18 April 2011, a copy of
which is attached.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY QY
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,

© pote Io
SALMAN

ROBERT D.
Acting Executive Director

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04624-11

    Original file (04624-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 2011. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 April 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 the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • 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 | 00689-11

    Original file (00689-11.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 I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “however, MRO [Marine reported on] was assigned to the CMC informal 120 day appointment to BCP [Body Composition Program] per MCO [Marine Corps Order] 6110.3 effective 8-Aug- Os .” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06758-11

    Original file (06758-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested completely removing the fitness report for 1 June to 30 September 2009. It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “, when required” and from section K.4 (reviewing officer’s comments), “- MRO [Marine reported on] attempted to maintain order during a very hectic and high paced deployment.” A three-member panel of the Board for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 07040-11

    Original file (07040-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested completely removing the fitness report for 1 June 2010 to 8 May 2011. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 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 | CY2011 | 06783-11

    Original file (06783-11.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 5 October 2007 by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's comments), “Will gain valuable experience during and is slated for deployment in support of the Battalion’s next OIF [Operation Iragi Freedom] rotation which is a must for his continued progression.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered...

  • 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 | 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...

  • 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 | 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.