DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BIG
Docket No: 8062-10
18 March 2011
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, ain effect, that the fitness report for 1
December 2008 to 31 March 2009 be modified, in accordance with
the reporting senior’s (RS's) letter dated 10 August 2009, by
raising the marks in sections D.1l (“performance”) , D.2
(“proficiency”), E.2 (“Effectiveness Under Stress”), F.4
(“Ensuring Well-being of Subordinates”) and G.3 (“Judgment”)
From *D" (fourth best of seven possible marks) to “E” (third
best).
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 17 March 2011. 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. The Board also considered
the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance
Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 27 July 3010, 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 report of the PERB. The Board
recognized that the RS's letter was submitted less than five
months after the reporting period, however, it was unable to
find the proposed revised marks were more fair and accurate
that the contested marks originally assigned. In view ef the
above, your request 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 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 opficial
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,
Enclosure
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 | CY2011 | 01984-11
You requested, in effect, that the fitness report for 16 December 2009 to 30 April 2010 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS's) letter dated 25 August 2010, by raising the marks in sections D.1 (“Performance”) and D.2 (“Proficiency”) from “C” (fifth best of seven possible marks) to “D” (fourth best), and E.2 (*Effectiveness Under Stress”) and G.1 (‘Professional Military Education”) from “B” (second best) to “C.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 08242-09
cis A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11693-10
You also requested that the service record page 11 counseling entry dated 21 November 2008 be modified by deleting the following: Your demonstrated lack of maturity, judgment and decision making abilities, specifically your inappropriate sexual relationship with a CPL [corporal] [pay grade E=-4}(fthen a PFC [private first class) [pay grade E-2] when it started). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3...
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 | CY2011 | 00682-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. 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 | CY2011 | 05153-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 2011. 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 | 11630-08
You requested that the fitness report for 10 January to 29 July 2006 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS’s) letter dated 16 November 2006 and the reviewing officer’s (RO’s) undated endorsement, by raising the mark in Section G.1 (“Professional Military Education”) from *c” (fifth best of seven possible marks) to “E” (third best) and section G.3 (“Judgment”) from “B” (sixth best) to *c.” A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in...