DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 7130-08
11 August 2008
This is in reference to your application of 23 January 2008 for
correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of
title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552. Your case,
originally assigned docket number 2942-08, was administratively
closed by our letter of 17 June 2008. In light of your letter
of 22 July 2008 and the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) letter
of 15 July 2008, your case was administratively reopened and
assigned a new docket number, 7130-08.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 7 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 letter of 22 July 2008 and the HQMC letter of
15 July 2008, 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 HQMC Performance Evaluation Review
Board (PERB), dated 19 March 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.
In addition, since the reviewing officer did not assume
reporting senior authority for the fitness report at issue, the
Board was unable to find the reporting senior (RS) had, in fact,
been relieved for cause before having submitted the report.
Finally, since the Board was unable to find the RS lacked the
Capacity to submit a fair and accurate evaluation of your
performance, it could not find you warranted a report
substantively different from the one that officer submitted. In
view of the above, your application 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,
Executive Di
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09103-08
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 further the fitness report in question, you may submit your letter of 15 March 2008, with the reporting senior’s endorsement, to future selection boards. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07414-08
This is in naval reco United Sta You requeste May 2006 ar Year (FY) 40 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JSR Docket No: 7414-08 4 September 2008 reference to your application for correction of your d pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the es Code, section 1552. d removal of the fitness report for 6 April to 31 hd all documentation of your removal from the Fiscal 07 Lieutenant Colonel Promotion List; reinstatement to that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10007-08
The Board was unable to find you should have been put on recruiting probation before your relief as area staff noncommissioned officer in charge (ASNCOIC) since your relief was not based entirely on failure to make recruiting mission. The Board found it was a harmless error that the reporting senior (RS) mentioned the alleged failure to make mission in section C (“Billet Accomplishments”) of the fitness report. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05658-07
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 | CY2006 | 06678-06
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 2O370 -5100BJGDocket No: 6678-0617 November 2005This 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 1 June 2004 to 9 May 2005 and 9 May to 30 June 2005, as well as your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.It...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05946-08
You requested, in effect, that the fitness report for 9 June to 25 August 2006 be modified, in accordance with the reporting (RS’s) letter dated 2 June 2008, by raising the marks senior’s in sections D.1 (“Performance”), D.2 (“Proficiency”), F.2 (“Developing Subordinates”), F.4 (‘Ensuring Well-being of Subordinates”) and G.2 (“Decision Making Ability”) from “D” (fourth best of seven possible marks) to “E” (third best); and section G.1 (“Professional Military Education”) from “E” to...
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 | 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 | 01203-08
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 remove the original report or enter the revised report in your record, you may submit the RS’s letter to future selection boards. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
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...