DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 5860-08
14 August 2008
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 reports for 1 May to
6 September 2002, 7 September 2002 to 31 May 2003 and 1 June to
31 July 2003 be modified, in accordance with the reporting
senior’s (RS’s) letter dated 19 March 2008, by raising the
average of marks assigned to 4.61 (on a seven-point scale, where
“G” (best of seven possible marks) is 7 and “A” (lowest) is 1)
from 4.42 in the first report and 4.33 in the second (third is
an extended report).
A three~member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 14 August 2008. 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 10 June 2008, 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 reports in
question, you may submit the RS’s letter 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,
Sans
W. DEAN PFEDLRF
Executive Dirac
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07208-06
Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 2 August 2006 to consider Lieutenant Colon ‘ petition contained in reference (a). He provides an advocacy letter from the reporting senior that states, “these changes will better reflect his (MRO’s) overall performance as it relates to my cumulative average on reports written on majors.” He also requests that seven attribute markings be changed on the fitness report covering the period 20020611 to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02890-09
(*“Decision Making Ability”) from “D"” to *E.” : A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ' Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2009. In addition, the Board considered the reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 18 March and 10 August 2009, copies of which are attached, your letter of 27 March 2009 and the RS’s letter of the same date. Consequently, when applying for a correction...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01527-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 July 2008. 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 | CY2008 | 01201-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2008. 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 | CY2008 | 12035-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08821-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2008. 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 10809-08
You requested, in effect, that the fitness report for 1 July 2007 to 31 May 2008 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS’s) letter dated 28 August 2008, by changing the marks in sections F.1 (“leading subordinates”), F.2 (“developing subordinates”) and F.4 (“ensuring well-being of subordinates”) from “H” (not observed) to “D” (fourth best of seven possible marks); raising sections F.3 (“setting the example”) and F.5 (“communication skills”) from "D” to “BE” (third best)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08062-10
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 names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 | 00986-08
Enclosure1610MMER/PERMEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDSSubj: MARINE CORPS PERFOMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB)ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OFRef: (a)Form 149 of 15 Jun 07(b) MC&PTflQ.7F1. In Support of his appeal, he has submitted a letter from the RS requesting the marks be changed.3. Section C of the report clearly states that MRO closed 170 trouble tickets, thus indicating that the RS did take thisSubj: MARINE CORPS...