DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Decket No: 5418-11
9 September 2011
Dear Gunnery Sergean geen
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 9 September 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
advisory opinion from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 20 July
2011, a copy of which is attached, and your letter dated 29
August 2011.
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 advisory opinion.
The documentation you provided did not convince the Board that
you were measured by only one evaluator, rather than two; that
the command did not review your weight loss or reapportionment
plan for effectiveness and possible adjustment; or that you were
not afforded an opportunity to be reevaluated. 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 is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice. ‘
Sincerely,
1p Der
W. DEAN PF
Executive rector
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06205-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 11 July 2011, a copy of which is attached.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05737-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01962-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 October 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05700-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 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 | 06696-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ’ Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered your case on 6 October 2011. In view of the above, the Board again voted to deny your request for complete removal of the page 11 entry and your rebuttal. 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 | NR1841 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on >6 June 2014. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 15 May 2014, 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. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03701-11
The Board also considered your counsel’s letters dated 11 November 2010 and 22 April 2011 with enclosure. Since the Board still found no defect in your fitness report record, it had no basis to recommend your advancement to either pay grade E-8 or E-9,. In view of the above, the Board again voted to deny relief.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04160-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 2011. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinions in finding you should not receive remedial consideration for promotion. 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 | 06111-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2011. The Board also considered the advisory opinions from the Marine Corps Recruiting Command Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, dated 13 August and 28 December 2010, and the letter from this Board, dated 20 January 2011 with enclosures, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03618-11
2B three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2011. in addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 20 April 2011 with attachment and 21 April 2011 with attachments, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...