Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00762-11
Original file (00762-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

JSR
Docket No: 762-11
10 March 2011

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 a.
November 2009 to 30 April 2010.

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), “-Continues to grow
and learn how to work within a Bn [battalion] level staff.” and
“_Ranked 5 of 5 WO [warrant officer] /CWO [chief warrant
officer])s within the Bn.”

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 March 2011. 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 (HQOMC) Performance
Fvaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 12 January 2011, 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 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,

Wom

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di

  
  

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04143-11

    Original file (04143-11.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 applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board did not find persuasive the reporting senior’s letter Of 30 August 2010, recommending that the contested fitness report be removed as he did not believe that you rated an adverse report. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4255 14

    Original file (NR4255 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    fitness report meets the criteria for derogatory material in Sect A, Item 6B and is rendered adverse IAW [in accordance with] MCO [Marine Corps Order] P1610.7F. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC)} Performance Evaluation Review Board {PERB}), dated 31 March 2014 as amended by the HOMC e-mail dated 10 April 2014 with attachments, copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11428-10

    Original file (11428-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested modifying the fitness report for 1 October 2009 to 28 January 2010 by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's comments), the comment “SNM [subject named Marine] does not possess the mental dexterity required to lead Marines in extremely challenging environments.” In the alternative, you requested completely removing the contested report. CMC further directed removing, from page 2 of your statement dated 20 February 2010, the following: “I do possess the mental...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09823-10

    Original file (09823-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested reports for 11 March to 15 July 2009 and 1 August to 30 September 2009; and modifying the report for 1 October 2008 to 10 March 2009 by removing the mark in section A, item 6.c (“Disciplinary Action”) and removing, from the third sighting officer’s comments, “SNM [Subject named Marine] has been the subject of numerous Human Factor Boards and Stan [standardization] Boards; all recommendations from...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01971-11

    Original file (01971-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested completely removing the fitness reports for 28 October 2007 to 1 March 2008 and 2 March to 2 September 2008. It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 28 October 2007 to l March 2008 by removing the entire section K (reviewing officer's marks and comments) and removing, from section I (reporting senior (RS)’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “His next assignment as a canvassing recruiter will potentially allow...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02017-11

    Original file (02017-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested report for 24 March to 30 September 2006. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 2011. 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 | CY2012 | 09754 12

    Original file (09754 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2011 | 06758-11

    Original file (06758-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested completely removing the fitness report for 1 June to 30 September 2009. 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”), “, when required” and from section K.4 (reviewing officer’s comments), “- MRO [Marine reported on] attempted to maintain order during a very hectic and high paced deployment.” A three-member panel of the Board for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08487-10

    Original file (08487-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted im support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 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. Since the Board found insufficient basis to remove your failure of selection by the FY 2011...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 07040-11

    Original file (07040-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested completely removing the fitness report for 1 June 2010 to 8 May 2011. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2011. 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.