DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5700
BIG
Docket No: 9245-09
26 February 2010
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 that the fitness report for 14 July 2007 to 1
March 2008 be modified by marking section A, items 3.c (“Type”)
and 6.a (“Commendatory Material”) and removing section K .
(reviewing officer’s marks and comments.) It is noted that the
Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed entering a
mark of “BY” (combat and joint duty) in item 3.c, marking item
6.a and adding to section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and
Additional Comments”) “MRO [Marine reported on] received MSM
[Meritorious Service Medal] from previous command.” You also
requested consideration by a special selection board for
promotion to lieutenant colonel and remedial consideration for
command slating. Your request for remedial consideration for
command slating was not considered, as there is no provision
for such consideration. When you are next considered for
command, you will have the benefit of the corrections that have
been made to your record.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 25 February 2010. 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 (HQMC)
Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 20. August
2009, the advisory opinion from the HOMC Officer Counseling and
Evaluation Section, Personnel Management Division (MMOA-4),
dated 24 August 2009, and the memoranda for the record, dated
19 and 22 October 2009, copies of which are attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establgsh 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 and the comments from MMOA-4 reflected in
the memorandum for the record dated 22 October 2009.
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
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 ef an
official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to
demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
Sincerely,
Rp Dd, fo
ROBERT DY ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosures
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07740-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2009. 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 | CY2001 | 02098-00
Your request to enter a “CD” (change of duty) fitness report for 9 March to 10 April 1991, reflecting service in combat with the primary duty of adjutant, could not be considered, as you did not provide such a report. the Reporting Senior's actions in 3c is in no way an invalidating factor in Reference (b) did not contain a very filling out Item 3c and Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05333-01
directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report: Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has the Performance Evaluation Review Board Date of Keport Reporting Senior Period of Report 22 Jan 99 980801 to 981231 (CH) There will be inserted in your Naval record a memorandum in 2. review ailed + Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) to remove the Change of Reporting Senior Fitness Report for the period 980801 to 981231. equests...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00095-01
Head, Performance Evaluation Review Branch Personnel Management Division By direction of the Commandant of the Marine Corps DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NeADQUARTeRS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 134-B 103 S~BORUSSELLROAD VJRGINlA 22 OUANTICO, From: To: Subj: CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) MC0 1610.11C’ Per the reference, the Performance Evaluation Review Board 1. has reviewed allegations of error and injustice in your Naval record. directed that your Naval record will be corrected by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01749-08
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the report ending 31 December 2001 and modifying the report ending 6 July 2004 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), all the material to which you objected: “With guidance”; “Adequately” and “Overall, I rate him 6 of 6 Captains [sic] in the Battalion. [sic].” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07185-01
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 | CY2006 | 06373-06
Specifically concerning the contested section K of the fitness report for 2 September 2000 to 5 March 2001, the Board found the mark in section K.3, the second lowest of eight possible marks, did not require marking section K.2 (“Evaluation”) “Do Not Concur [with reporting senior].” The Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion from MMOA-4 in concluding your selection by the FY 2007 Major Selection Board would have been definitely unlikely, even if the correction directed by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07342-02
As indicated in enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) has directed removal of the contested section K. Petitioner further requested removal of his failure of selection before the Fiscal Year 2003 Major Selection Board, so as to be considered by the selection board that next convenes to consider officers of his category for promotion to the grade of major as an officer who has not failed of selection to that grade. ith Head,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00955-00
The Board's opinion, 4. vote, is that Report A should remain a part of Captain official military record. Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the Directed by the Commandant of the Marine Corps fitness report of 980117 to 980904. failures of selection. Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the Captain record and SMC Major he successfully petitioned the Duty fitness report of 940201 to 940731. requests removal of his failures of selection.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08458-10
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed the requested modification of the report for 26 July 2006 to 28 February 2007. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 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.