DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 174-09
12 February 2009
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 completely removing the fitness report for 1
January to 26 April 2002. 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”), “With experience, should develop into
a good admin [administrative] chief [language to which you did
not expressly object] ." and removing, from section K.4
(reviewing officer’s comments), “At this point, requires
supervision to achieve desired results, but striving to grow.”
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 12 February 2009. 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
report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB), dated 6 January 2009, a copy of which is
attached, and your letter dated 3 February 2009 with enclosures.
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.
While the Board recognized that the fitness report for 1 January
to 31 December 2001, from the same reporting senior, was marked
higher than the contested report, the Board observed that the
only deficiency noted in the report at issue was that you
required “supervision to achieve desired results [language whose
removal has been directed]." The Board was unable to find this
would have called for formal counseling, that the period of the
report in question was too short to allow for improvement, or
that the report itself was used as a counseling tool. In view
of the above, your application for relief beyond or other than
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 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,
Te, Pa
FA W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03521-09
However, in only 60 days since the end of his last reporting period, I cannot say that he has moved up in his peer ranking.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) dated 1 April 2009, a copy of which is attached. Removal of the fitness reports for the periods 19990101...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12153-09
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 | CY2009 | 00839-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested fitness report for 10 January to 28 February 2006 by restoring the mark in section A, item 6.b (“Derogatory Material”) whose removal CMC had directed in your previous case, docket number 5661-08; removing, from the section D.1 (“Performance”) justification, “MRO [Marine reported on] was relieved of duties for violating Depot Order P1510.30L on three separate occasions.” and “because on another...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12296-09
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 this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB, except the Board was persuaded that the reporting senior’s portion of the original version of a superseded version of the contested fitness report for 3 October 2007 to 30 September...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11386-09
You requested completely removing the fitness report for 31 March to 5 October 2007. and “completed most tasks when supervised and.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. 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 | CY2009 | 06116-09
You also requested completely removing the fitness report for 15 November 2004 to 30 May 2005 and modifying the report for 1 June to l September 2005 by removing the entire section K (RO marks and comments) or, if that modification is denied, raising the mark in section K.3. It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing all the contested comments from sections I and K.4 of the report for 14 June to 3 August 2004; modifying the report for 15 November 2004 to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12935-09
It ig noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 17 July 2007 to 31 May 2008 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “Able to complete tasks with supervision and or assistance.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9150 14
It ig noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested fitness report by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), "MRO [Marine reported on] best performs in an environment working for staif noncommissioned officers and senior enlisted Marines who can supervise her daily tasks so as to ensure details are adhered to and timeliness is attained.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9152 14
You requested completely removing the fitness report for 5 April to 30 November 2007, and you impliedly requested removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 20615 Major Selection Board. In this regard, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion in finding your selection by the FY 2015 promotion board would have been definitely unlikely, even if your record had reflected the modifications CMC has directed to the fitness report at issue. Consequently, when:...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4748 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on lt September 2014. 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...