Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11963 14
Original file (NR11963 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

HD
Docket No: NR11963-14
1, May 2025

    

Pe ora ate

Dear Sergean tiie

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, gectiom, 1552.

tely removing the fitness report for
2014.

Records, sitting if

5 7 = + * ”* * 7 mie
application on 30 Ap
injustice were revi
requlations anc

Board. Documentary

of your application,
support cthereor, your
reg policies

report of a
Review Board (PERB
attached.

 

It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has
directed modifying the contested report by removing the entire
section kK (reviewing officer's marks and comments) .

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
evidence within one year from the date of the Board’s decision.
New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in this case. 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,

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

 

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11418-09

    Original file (11418-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. : | 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. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11964 14

    Original file (NR11964 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested completely removing the fitness report tor 14 June to 31 October 2012. your applicacio ogether with all material submivrec Ath support thereo applicable statutes, regulations anc ft the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 27 October 2014, a copy of which is attached. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4761 14

    Original file (NR4761 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has Girected modifying the contested report for 28 April to 31 December 2011 by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's (RO’s) comments), “MRO [Marine reported on] continues to develop and hone skills required to effectively support Special Operations Marines in combat operations.” and further directed removing the entire section K (RO’s marks and comments) from each of the other three reports at issue. A three-member panel...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12997 14

    Original file (NR12997 14.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 January 2015. 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12153-09

    Original file (12153-09.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 February 2010. 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 | CY2014 | NR10589 14

    Original file (NR10589 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Orr THE WAVY F Ee : CORRECTION OF NAVAL RE CORDS uu INGTON, VA 22204-2420 JSR Docket No: NR10589-14 4 Decemper 2014 Dear Colonel ee * : 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 L552 » You requested % that the fitness report for 7 December 2009 to 21 July 2010 be modified by removing the entire section K (reviewing officer’s (RO’S) marks and comments) . New evidence is evidence not...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7243 14

    Original file (NR7243 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested completely removing the fitness report for 1 April to 25 June 2012. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 5 June 2014, 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 | NR8174 14

    Original file (NR8174 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 September 2014. Decumentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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 | 12181-09

    Original file (12181-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Specifically, cmc has directed removing, from section I (reporting senior's “Directed and Additional Comments”), “Directed Comment, Sect [ion] A, 8F: MRO [Marine reported on] was assigned to the Body Composition Program (BCP) during this reporting period.” and from section K.4 (reviewing officer’s comments), “due to her assignment to BCP.” By electronic mail dated 10 March 2010, a copy of which is attached, the staff of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) advised Headquarters...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02867-09

    Original file (02867-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the report by removing the entire section K (reviewing officer’s marks and comments). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2009. 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.