DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 207-1060
4 March 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 completely removing the fitness report for 27
September 2006 to 31 May 2007.
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”), “Directed Comment: MRO [Marine reported on] subject
of a Field Flight Performance Board due to not having specific
ability or aptitude.” and removing, from section K.4 (reviewing
officer’s comments), “As indicated by the RO [sic], [you were]
recommended for a Field Flight Performance Board based upon
[your] aviation abilities and aptitude. In non-flying billets I
have the utmost confidence that [you] will succeed and advance
as a Marine Officer [sic] .”
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 4 March 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 Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB), dated 5 January 2010, a copy of which is
attached.
BRfter 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.
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,
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11557-09
It 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 comments), “- MRO [Marine reported on] becoming familiar with reserve administration.” and “- MRO’s leadership ability continues to develop in [sic] improve.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. Documentary material considered by the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 09754 12
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying all four contested fitness reports, as follows: 1 August to 31 December 2009: From section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), remove “I fully expect MRO [Marine reported on] to continue making improvements and if he does” and “with his peers.” 26 June to 6 December 2010: From section K.4 (reviewing officer’s comments), remove “As a Sergeant of Marines MRO is still developing his...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12997 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 2015. 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02224-10
the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report by removing, from the section K.4 (reviewing officer’s comments) Addendum Page, “Future assignments for [you] should be in positions were [sic] [you] can be closely supervised and compete with [your] contemporaries within [your] MOS [military occupational specialty] .” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 2010. Documentary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05673-08
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 16 April to 31 December 2004 by removing from section I (reporting senior (RS)’s “Directed and Additional Comments”) “Good potential for growth in a billet allowing for mentorship from senior SNCOs [staff noncommissioned officers].” and from section K.4 (reviewing officer (RO)’s comments) “-Produces good results when given detailed guidance and close, direct supervison [sic].”...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09857-09
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 addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps — Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 14 September 2009, a copy of which is attached. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR13148 14
noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has Girected modifying the contested report by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional comments”), “MRO [Marine reported on] requires supervision for daily tasks outside the norm and of a more complex nature." Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval recoré and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Mon Sep 25 11_43_12 CDT 2000
In addition to challenging Report C based on perceived violations of reference (c), the petitioner also believes the report reflects more of Lieutenant Co1one1-~~’s bias against him than actual performance. In addition, Lieutenant ColoneElLllIIIIJwas the 2 Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF MAJOR ___ USMC petitioner’s Reporting Senior for the prior three month report, and was the Reviewing Officer on two other...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07860-08
It is further noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the report by removing, from section I (reporting senior (RS) “Directed and Additional Comments”) “DIRECTED COMMENT -—- SECT A, ITEM 7b: I recommend that the MRO [Marine reported on] not be promoted with contemporaries.” And completely removing section K (reviewing officer (RO) marks and comments). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12667-09
.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2010. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 2 December 2009, a copy of which is attached. 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.