DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY gl
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 |
JSR
Docket No: 9257-09
29 October 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 15 June 2007.
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has
directed modifying the contested neport by removing, from
section K.4 (reviewing officer's marks and comments), “and
issued NPLOC [nonpunitive letter of caution] on May 7th, 2007.”
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 29 October 2009. Your allegations of exror 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 26 August 2009, a copy of. which is
attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration cf 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 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,
WSS
Executive Di
\
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07587-09
You requested completely removing the fitness reports for 4 February to 15 May 2006, 3 April to 2 July 2007,and 3 July to 13 October 2007. You further requested, if the report for 4) February to 15 May 2006 is not completely removed, that it be modified by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's comments), “from an external perspective.” | Tt is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested fitness report for 3 July to 13 October 2007 by...
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 | 09809-09
You further requested that these reports, as well as the report for 31 October 2007 to 30 June 2008, be modified by adding, to section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “MRO [Marine reported on] meets Physical Evaluation criteria in MCO [Marine Corps Order] 6100.12, and is within standards.” Finally, you requested removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year 2010 Active Reserve Colonel Selection Board, and granting you special selection board consideration...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11633-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 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 | CY2009 | 09222-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the report for 27 February to 21 April 2008 as you requested, A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03838-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested report for 29 December 2001 to 15 May 2002. 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 | 09264-09
Tt is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's marks and comments), “With continued effort MRO [Marine reported on] should be considered for promotion with peers.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08535-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC} has directed modifying the contested fitness report by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s (RS’s) “Directed and Additional Comments”), “[You are] capable of producing bigger and better performance and work.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 October 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02867-09
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.