Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06247-11
Original file (06247-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490

 

HD:hd

Docket No. 06247-11
1 March 2012

 

Dear pe:

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, in effect, that the
enlisted performance evaluation report for 2 May to 15 November
2003 be modified by changing the mark of “2.0” (second lowest of
five possible marks) in block 36 (“Military Bearing/Character”).

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 1 March 2012. 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 considered the advisory opinion furnished by
the Navy Personnel Command dated 6 July 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 advisory opinion.
Accordingly, 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,

\sMam&

W. DEAN PF
Executive tor

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4646-13

    Original file (NR4646-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that the enlisted performance evaluation report for 16 March 2012 to 15 March 2013 be modified by raising the mark in block 45 (*Promotion Recommendation - Individual”) from “Promotable” (third best of five possible marks} to “the appropriate and proportional rating deserving of the work put forth.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2014. Documentary material considered by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 09583 12

    Original file (09583 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 March 2013. 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, particularly noting that block S1 (“Signature...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04249-12

    Original file (04249-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 September 2012. 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 | CY2012 | 05926-12

    Original file (05926-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 September 2012. The Board also considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 5 June 2012, and the advisory opinion from the HQMC Military Justice Branch, Judge Advocate Division (JAM1), dated 13 April 2012, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR475-13

    Original file (NR475-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the fitness report in question as you requested. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 2013. 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 warranting removal of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 06097-12

    Original file (06097-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 September 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 | CY2012 | 08548 12

    Original file (08548 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2011 | 04089-11

    Original file (04089-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25.January 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 | CY2013 | NR979 13

    Original file (NR979 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2013. A 3.0 conduct mark average was required for a fully honorable characterization of service. 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 LnjUSsL.Les.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1986 14

    Original file (NR1986 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 7O1 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD. 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. 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, kD Ko ROBERT D. ZSALMAN Acting Executive Director Enclosure