DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL REGORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 1558-11
7 April 2011
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
isi ef title 10 of the
United States Code, section 1552.
ving the fitness report for 9 June
to 30 September 2008 and modifying the report for l October 2007
to 8 June 2008 by changing the entry in section A, item 3.a
(“occ [occasion]") from “CH” (change of reporting senior) to
You requested completely remo
“cs” (change of status).
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 7 April 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 Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB), dated 9 February 2011, a copy of which is
attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
the Board found that the evidence submitted was
record,
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 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,
\oaa$
W. DEAN PF
Feecutive Daredter
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01981-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2011. 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 fora correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05700-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 2011. 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 | CY2011 | 06608-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 December 2011. 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 | CY2014 | NR5184 14
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 1 July to 12 December 2008 by changing the date in section A, item 3.b (beginning date) from *20080701" to “20081002” {and filing in your record an administrative filler for 1 July to 1 October 2008} and modifying the report for 13 December 2008 to 19 May 2009 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed ana Additional Comments”), all but the first sentence and in section K...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4761 14
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has Girected modifying the contested report for 28 April to 31 December 2011 by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's (RO’s) comments), “MRO [Marine reported on] continues to develop and hone skills required to effectively support Special Operations Marines in combat operations.” and further directed removing the entire section K (RO’s marks and comments) from each of the other three reports at issue. A three-member panel...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09828-07
You requested, in effect, that the fitness reports for 15 April to 31 December 2005 and 1 January to 9 June 2006 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS’s) undated letter, by changing the marks in sections F.] (“Leading Subordinates”), F.2 (“Developing Subordinates”) and F.4 (“Ensuring Well-being of Subordinates”) from “H” (not observed) to “p” (fourth best of seven possible marks) in the case of the report for 15 April to 31 December 2005, and “EF” (third best) in the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03202-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 2011. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01226-09
You requested, in effect, that the fitness report for 1 January to 31 March 2008 be modified, in accordance with the reporting Senior's (RS’s) letter dated 13 June 2008 and e-mail dated 1 December 2008, by changing the rifle entry in section A, item 8.a from “N” (not required) to “X” (required did not fire) and adding the following comment in section I (RS’s “Directed and Additional Comments”) to support the entry of “X”: “MRO [Marine reported on] was not afforded the opportunity to attend...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05058-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 September 2008. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion, except to note your request was not for remedial consideration for promotion to master sergeant, but adjusting the date of rank and effective date of your promotion to reflect selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Master Sergeant Selection...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02017-11
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.