DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 4624-11
23 May 2011
ees.
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 J
January to 23 May 2005.
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has
directed modifying the contested fitness report by removing,
from the reviewing officer’s Addendum Page dated 12 July 2005,
the following:
Having failed to act in a supervisory manner with his
section, he was relieved of his responsibilities by the
Department Head during the preceding non-observed [sic]
period specifically so he could dedicate himself towards
improving his MOS [military occupational specialty]
skills. As a 3432 [finance technician], this Marine must
be able to perform as a SNCOIC [staff noncommissioned
officer in charge] of either section; his inability or
unwillingness to capitalize on this support the RS
[reporting senior]’s recommendation that this Marine not
be promoted with contemporaries.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 19 May 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 18 April
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,
eon OS | Edina eens
ROBERT D. SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00933-06
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the uncontested “not observed” fitness report for 16 March to 1 June 2004. Per the reference, the Performance Evaluation Review Board has reviewed allegations of error and injustice in subject’s naval record and the following action is requested: a. That subject’s naval record be corrected by removing the following fitness report: Date of Report Reporting Senior Period of Report 29 June 2005 LtCol - 20040316 to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10179-06
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the observed report for 10 September to 2 December 2005, which you wanted to be left in the record.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 December 2006. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 14 November 2006, a copy of which is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2718 14
You requested completely removing the fitness reports for 23 June to 29 September 2011 and 1 January to 10 May 2012. It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps {CMC} has directed removing the contested report for 1 January to 10 May 2012 and modifying the report for 23 June to 29 September 2011 by changing the entry in section A, item 3.a (“Occasion”) from “pc” (directed by CMC) to “CD” (change of duty); changing the entry in section A, item @.d (height in inches) from 70 to...
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06258-06
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 10 July 2006 with attachment, 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. Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS3280 RUSSELL ROADQUANT100, VIRGINIA...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09823-10
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 | 04143-11
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 | CY2011 | 04605-11
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”), “3 of 3 Staff Sergeants within the platoon.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5200 14
AR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your 2014. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08393-06
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 29 August 2006, a copy of which is attached. In regard to the report covering the period 20020707 to 20030302 (TDi, the petitioner contends the report is inaccurate based on the reviewing officers non-concurrence with the reporting senior’s attribute markings. The Board concluded that Subj}: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION...