|
¥
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
HD
Docket No: NR11965-14
Vo Mat 9A
au
c
+ take y ~
4
a
Deana
This is in.reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 ef the
United States Code; section 1552.
h three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
4 itting in executive session, considered your
30 April 2015. Your allegations of error and
reviewed in accordance with administrative
nd procedures a she proceedings of this
Documentary material the Board consisted
cation, tTogerher Material submittea in
=, your naval licable statutes
nd policies. in addition, the Board consiaerea the
D
opinion from Headquarters Marine Corps
eview Board (PERB), dated 27 October
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 comnection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB.
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
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’NETLL
Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1712 14
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08559-09
“You requested, in effect, that the fitness report for 28 November 2007 to 31 May 2008 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS’s) letter dated 8 May 2009, by raising the marks in sections D.1 (“Performance”), D.2 (“Proficiency”), E.1 ("Courage”), F.1 (“Leading Subordinates”),. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08069-02
In your current application, you again request removing the original report, but you also add a new request to replace it with a revised report the reporting senior has submitted for the pertinent period. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive governing submission of the report. Nothing has been furnished with reference (a) that documents any factual errors associated with the fitness report - Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07267-01
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. The following is offered as relevant: a. Evidently both the petitioner and the Reporting Seniors the Marine reported on needs to be seen by a for both reports have misunderstood the criteria contained in references (b) and (c) concerning weight issues. To be placed on Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03419-99
3 In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps ~erfa/rmance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 24 May 1999, a copy of which is attachM. 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. Sincerelv W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF T H E NAVY H E A D Q U A R T E R S U N I T E D STATES M A R I N E C ~ R P...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07414-08
This is in naval reco United Sta You requeste May 2006 ar Year (FY) 40 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JSR Docket No: 7414-08 4 September 2008 reference to your application for correction of your d pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the es Code, section 1552. d removal of the fitness report for 6 April to 31 hd all documentation of your removal from the Fiscal 07 Lieutenant Colonel Promotion List; reinstatement to that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09135-07
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 Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERE), dated 21 September 2007, a copy of which is attached, and your letter dated 28 October 2007.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08254-01
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has modified the contested fitness report for 1 September 1999 to 30 April 2000 by adding the revised reviewing officer comments dated 9 October deleting the nonconcurrence with the mark assigned in item H. 1 (evaluation of your responsibility as a reporting official). In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 5 November 2001, a copy of which is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06691-01
The Board found the reviewing officer permissibly referred to matters outside the reporting period in question, in order to reply to issues you raised in your rebuttal to the contested fitness report. 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. As an adverse fitness report, the petitioner was afforded his rightful opportunity to acknowledge and respond...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05613-00
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 Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 14 August 2000, and a memorandum for the record dated 11 July 2001, copies of which are attached. nd Lieutenant Colon challenged report centers around the accuracy...