a
rm Aye
na mNm FY
DEPARTMENT OF TH
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100)
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2480 -
JSR
Docket No: NR86ii-13
15 October 2014
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 removing the fitness reports for 2 June 20i1 to 28
February 2012 and 29 February to 3 April 2012 and the service
record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entries dated
28 February 2012 with your rebuttal dated 2 March 2012 and 2
April 2012 with your rebuttal dated 3 April 2012. —
Tt is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has
directed modifying the contested fitness report for 2 June 2011
to 28 February 2012 by filing a Memorandum for the Record
showing that section A, item 6.a (“Commendatory Material”) is
marked, and including in section I (reporting senior’s “Directed
and Additional Comments”) “Directed Comments: Item 6A: MRO
[Marine reported on] was awarded a Meritorious Mast and two
Letters of Appreciation during this reporting period.”
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 15 October 2014. 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
ef 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
reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance
Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 14 November 2013 and 22
July 2014, and the advisory opinion from HQMC dated 27 January
2014, copies of which are attached. The Board also considered
your letter dated 30 November 2013 in reply to the report of the
PERB dated 14 November 2013.
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 reports of the PERB
and the advisory opinion. The Board noted that both contested
page 11 entries were signed by the commanding officer, not the
executive officer. In view of the above, 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 reconsidér its decision upon submission of new evidence
within one year from the date of the Board’s decision. New
evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in this case. In this regard, it
igs 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,
ROBERT J. O’ NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5207 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your — application on 18 September 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...
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 | CY1999 | 01250-99
Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN COLONEL (2) Standard Addendum Page 1 of 9 (Frame Ell, 04 Fiche). attachments to fitness reports, other reference (b). 4. vote, remain a part of Colonel limited corrective actions through is that the contested fitness report, as modified, should 3a(7) are considered sufficient.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5265 14
Tt is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”) of the contested report for 30 September 2022 to 25 June 2013 by removing the word “capable” from the First sentence and in the fifth sentence, changing the comma after the word “complete” to a period and removing “MRO [Marine reported on] should attend MOS [military occupational specialty] school at first opportunity.” and modifying section...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2726 14
dln addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 24 February 2014, a copy of which is attached. The Board found the letter from while complimentary to you, did not refute the grounds for your relief reflected in the contested fitness report. 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 | CY2013 | NR8532 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 2014. in addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 October 2013, the e- Mail from HQMC dated 19 November 2013, and the advisory opinions from HOMC dated 25 March 2014 with enclosure and 8 May 2014, copies of which are attached, - After careful and conscientious...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2813 14
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”), “-SNM (Subject named Marine] execute supervision and follow up.” and “ direction.” A three-member panel Records, sitting in executive gession, considered your application on 24 April 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00377 12
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 March 2013. 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 | NR4746 14
A three-member panel of ‘the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof and applicable statutes, regulations and policies, In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board dated 2 April 2014, the e-mail from HQMC dated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06881-99
They were unable to find how, if at all, his report influenced your nonjudicial punishment or your removal from the 1998 staff sergeant selection list, nor could they find how he changed his opinions following the review of his report by the CO. We reviewed Sergeant documents concerning his Administrative Remarks page 11 entries dated 980804 and 981125, Offenses and Punishment page 12 entry dated 990311 and CMC letter 1450/3 MMPR-2 dated 2. In view of the above, it is recommended...