DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
_ WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 11717-09
9 March 2010
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 3 August
2006 to 31 March 2007 be modified, in accordance with the
reporting senior’s (RS's) statements of 11 April and 7 October
2009 and the reviewing officer's (RO’s) statement of 27 October
2009, by raising the marks in sections E.3 (“Initiative”) and
F.5 (“Communication Skills”) 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 4 March 2010. 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 2 November
2009, a copy of which is attached. The Board also considered
your rebuttal letter dated 30 October 2009 with enclosures.
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, except to recognize that the RO now
Supports the requested changes. 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 RS's and RO’s statements to future
selection boards.
gt 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
Hecords. 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,
\onkepes
W. DEAN PFEYF
Executive Dine r
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02153-10
: 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
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 | 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 | CY2010 | 02226-10
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 | 03083-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 2010. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09484-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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 | 08554-09
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 | CY2009 | 08538-09
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 | 06125-09
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 | CY2012 | 07272-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, reguiations and policies. The Board found that your FY 2012 failure of selection should stand as well, since it found insufficient basis to modify your fitness report record;...