DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 7412-09
27 August 2009.
‘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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 27 August 2009. 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 29 June 2009, 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.
The Board found no inconsistency between the comment, in the
justification for the adverse mark of “A” assigned in section
F.1 (“Leading Subordinates”} of the contested fitness report, on
your failure to direct your subordinates abide by the Marine
Corps order that prohibits hazing and the comment, in section I
(reporting senior (RS)'s “Directed and Additional Comments”),
that you “possess the ability to direct junior Marines in the
performance of their duties.” The Board found your having
received no disciplinary action for the incident addressed in
the fitness report at issue did not invalidate the report. The
Board was unable to find you were not counseled during the
reporting period. In this regard, the Board generally does not
grant relief on the basis of an alleged absence of counseling,
as counseling takes many forms, so the recipient may not
recognize it as such when it is provided. Finally, the Board
was likewise unable to find the RS had an insufficient
relationship with you to allow him to submit the report in
question.
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. .
Conseguently, 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,
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00839-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested fitness report for 10 January to 28 February 2006 by restoring the mark in section A, item 6.b (“Derogatory Material”) whose removal CMC had directed in your previous case, docket number 5661-08; removing, from the section D.1 (“Performance”) justification, “MRO [Marine reported on] was relieved of duties for violating Depot Order P1510.30L on three separate occasions.” and “because on another...
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 | CY2008 | 12297-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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 | 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 | CY2014 | NR9781 14
You requested that the fitness report for 2 June 2012 to 20 June 2013 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS's) letter dated 27 September 2013, by raising the marks in sections E.3 (*Effectiveness-under Stress”), F.2 (“Developing Subordinates”), F.3 (“Setting the Example”) and F.5 (“Communication Skills”) from “D” (fourth best of seven possible marks) to “E” (third best) and lowering the mark in section F.4 (“Ensuring Well-being of Subordinates”) from “EB” to “Za” A...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 08548 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2012. 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 | 10800-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 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 | 10449-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 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. The Board was likewise unable to find the RO’s portion of the contested fitness report should have been “not observed,” noting that an observed...
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 | CY2010 | 02180-10
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. 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...