Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06665-01
Original file (06665-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
X

2 NAVY ANNE

S

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

BJG
Docket No: 6665-01
16 November 2001

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 15 November 2001. 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 furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, dated
31 October 2001, 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
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this regard,
important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.

and
it is

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,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

 

NAVY

DEPARTMENT OF THE
3280 RUSSELL ROAD

BUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103

IN REPLY REFER TO:

107 0
CMT
31 

Ott 01

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

RESERVE AF
CASE OF CW

We have reviewed Chief Warrant Office

1.
request for removal of his failure of selection and recommend
that it be denied.
The following justification is provided:

2.
received his second failure of selection on the
Fis
2 Board.
The fitness report in question, 9 Mar
2000 to 28 February 2001 was  
scanned into the system by Manpower Management Support Branch on
17 April 2001.
the fitness report in question,
the Promotion Board.
Although the fitness report in question
was not included on the Master Brief Sheet the Board did have a
complete and accurate record of his performance.

On 24 April 2001 his complete record, to include
was submitted electronically to

e received and electronically



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08069-00

    Original file (08069-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    not go before the Board. his record. uone of one" rating provides However, a The inclusion of this fitness report would likely The first missing fitness report in question (960401-970331) 2. was a favorable report.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01685-06

    Original file (01685-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the alternative, you now request new enlisted remedial selection boards (ERSB’s) for the Calendar Year (CY) 1999, 2000 and 2001 master sergeant and first sergeant selection boards.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2007. The Board found the ~Th’IPR-2 advisory opinion dated 2 August 2006 was correct as to the number of Marines with whom you were compared, despite the indications, in the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04271-01

    Original file (04271-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that the fitness report for 10 May to 27 June 1998 be modified by removing the mark of “EX/OS” (excellent/outstanding, the second highest) in item 15a (your estimate of this Marine’s general value to the service) and the marks in items 15b and c (showing five captains ranked above you and one with you). In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Review Board HQMC dated 22 May 2001, copies of which are attached. Those a8 shown in ( o r Jy...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07711-00

    Original file (07711-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and In addition, the Board considered the advisory applicable statutes, regulations and policies. They had no grounds to remove your failure by the FY 2002 Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, since they found insufficient basis to remove your failure by the FY 2001 selection board, and the fitness report in question was in your record...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05821-01

    Original file (05821-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (?O/ MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF MAJOR (PERB) R - I USMC ._ (b) MC0 P1610.7D DD Form 149 of 3 May 01 w/Ch l-4 Per MC0 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, 1. with three members present, Majo the fitness report for the period 970801 to 980519 (CH) was requested. Reference (a) requested an advisory opinion in the case...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03811-01

    Original file (03811-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    If that action is not possible, then the petitioner (b) is the Reference \\ . " s the Reviewing Officer on those two reports, as he was Colonel that if Colone he would have so stated in his review. Further, we recommend that his request for a special selection board through BCNR be denied since he has not exhausted the appropriate administrative procedures for requesting a special selection board set forth in references (b) and (c) contact in this matter is Capt Head, Promotion...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03768-03

    Original file (03768-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    of 11931 to “ 1” of 39933; or if neither of these actions is possible, remove the original report; and remove the failures of selection by the FY 2003 and 2004 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your letter, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board’s files on your prior cases, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The modification of the report would increase the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02041-01

    Original file (02041-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the record and 02 USMC He petitioned the porting Senior fitness report of 980831 to 990731. requests removal of his failures of selection. Performance Evaluation Review Board He failed selection He petitioned the (PERB) for removal of the rting Senior fitness report of 980831 to 990630. equests removal of his failures of selection. Head, Personnel Management Support was removed from the OMPF on 5 October emphatically states that the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07185-01

    Original file (07185-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Enclosure (2) is furnished to assist in By enclosure 3. a copy of the Advisory Opinion contained at enclosure (3), this Headquarters provided Majo ith Head, "Performance Evaluation Review Branch Personnel Management Division By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps 1610 MMER/PERB 23 kU6 20% From: Co To: Subj: CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) MC0 1610.11C MC 41 Per the reference, the Performance Evaluation Review Board 1. has reviewed allegations of error and injustice in your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04368-01

    Original file (04368-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    request for the By enclosure 3. a copy of the Advisory Opinion contained at (3), this Headquarters provide encl ith Review Branch Personnel Management Division By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY ,._iDQUARTERS UNITLD STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1610 MMER/PERB 2 1 MAY 2001 From: To: Subj: CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) MC0 1610.11C Per the reference, 1. has reviewed allegations of error and...