Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00625-06
Original file (00625-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



         BJG
         Docket No: 625-06
         27 February 2006








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, in effect, that the fitness report for
1 January to 27 April 2005 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior (RS) letter dated 29 July 2005 and the reviewing officer (RO) endorsement dated 15 September 2005, by raising the marks in sections D.2 (“proficiency”), E.l (“courage”), E.2 (“effectiveness under stress”), E.3 (“initiative”), F. 1 (“leading subordinates”), F.2 (“developing subordinates”), F.3 (“setting the example”), F.5 (“communication skills”), G.l (“professional military education”), G.2 (“decision making ability”) and G.3 (“judgment”) from “C” (fifth best of seven possible marks) to “D” (fourth best)
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2006. 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 19 January 2006, 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 has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
Although the Board voted not to modify the fitness report in question, you may submit the correspondence from the RS and RO to future selection boards.
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,




W.       DEAN PF EIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06125-09

    Original file (06125-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    best) to “D.” oO A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2009. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08554-09

    Original file (08554-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board further concurred with the advisory opinion in = concluding your selection by the FY 2010 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board would have been definitely unlikely, even if your record had not included the fitness report CMC has directed removing. request, a Although the Board voted not to modify the fitness report for i July 2005 to 21 June 2006, you may submit the RS’s letter and the RO’s endorsement to future selection boards. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02226-10

    Original file (02226-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 2010. 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 | CY2010 | 02153-10

    Original file (02153-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    : A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 2010. 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 | CY2010 | 02180-10

    Original file (02180-10.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. Although the Board voted not to modify the fitness report in question, you may submit the RS's letter and the RO’s endorsement to future selection boards. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05658-07

    Original file (05658-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370~s 100BJGDocket No:05658-0720 July 2007This 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, in effect, that the fitness report for 4 June 2005 to 30 June 2006 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior (RS) ‘s letter dated 17 Nay 2007, by raising the marks in sections D.l...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08538-09

    Original file (08538-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. 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 | CY2009 | 05012-09

    Original file (05012-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by modifying the fitness report for 1 July to 24 October 2006 (copy at Tab A}, in accordance with the letters at enclosure (1) from the reporting senior {RS) and reviewing officer (RO), undated and dated 8 January 2009, respectively, by raising the marks in sections D.1 (“Performance”),...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 10223-05

    Original file (10223-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100BJGDocket No:10223-0516 April 2007This 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, in effect, that the fitness report for 1 October 2000 to 31 May 2001 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS’s) letter dated 3 January 2005, by raising the marks in sections...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09228-09

    Original file (09228-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2009. 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...