DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD:hd
Docket No. 05737-11
22 September 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, considered your application on
22 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 and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the
Board congiderad the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel
Command dated 27 dune 2011, a copy of which is attached. The Board
also considered your letter dated 26 August 2011 with enclosure.
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. fn
this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments
contained in the advisory opinion. Your “chronological
documentation” did not persuade the Board that you had a personality
conflict with an officer who was not the reporting senior who
submitted the contested fitness report, or that such conflict
influenced the report. The Board was unable to find that block 9
(“Date Reported”) of the contested report was inaccurate. In view
of the above, your application has been denied. The names and votes
of the members of the panel wiil 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,
Ly) oa Sep
W. DEAN PFRIDFF
Executive Diredéror
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00581-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 2011. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 3 February and 1 March 2011, 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 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 | CY2010 | 09783-10
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 | 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 | 09830-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 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. 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 | 06608-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 December 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 | 04260-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2012. 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. 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 | 01971-11
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 | 06758-11
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 | CY2010 | 13505-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 March 2011. The Board also considered your e-mail dated 14 March 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.