~ DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY” 7-7
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7OtT S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JSR
Docket No: NR4761-14
12 June 2014
Dear Staff sergeant Ay
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 reports for 28
April to 31 December 2011, 1 January to 8 April 2012, 9 April to
15 June 2012 and 16 June 2012 to 12 January 2013.
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 of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 12 June 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
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 April 2014, 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,
ede >,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8716 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4252 14
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed the requested changes to the marks in sections E.2, F.1 and G.1. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 May 2014. 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 | CY2014 | NR7247 14
and by removing “Directed Comment, Sectfion] A, Item Tb: recommend that the MRO [Marine reported on] not be considered for promotion with his contemporaries.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 August 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...
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 | CY2012 | 12554 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 2013. of this Board. 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 | CY2008 | 12302-08
You requested completely removing the fitness reports for 25 July 2003 to 4 January 2004 (extended from 31. It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report ending 4 January 2004 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “MRO [Marine reported on] continues to seek self-improvement and is developing into a well rounded administrator”; removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer (RO)’s comments),...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03521-09
However, in only 60 days since the end of his last reporting period, I cannot say that he has moved up in his peer ranking.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) dated 1 April 2009, a copy of which is attached. Removal of the fitness reports for the periods 19990101...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11236 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 January 2015. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 30 September 2014, 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03192-09
You requested completely removing the fitness report for 1 June 2005 to 31 March 2006. In addition, the Board considered the reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 March and 2 April 2009, copies of which are 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.
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...