DEPARTMENT. OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1i S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JSR
Docket No: 7272-12
11 April 2013
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 that the fitness. report for 3 June 2010 to 30 June
2011 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior’s
{(RS‘'s) letter dated 11 March 2012 and the reviewing officer's
{RO’'s) undated endorsement, by raising the marks in sections E.1
(“Courage”) and E.2 (‘Effectiveness Under Stress”) from “C”
(fifth best of seven possible marks) to “D”: (fourth best). You
also impliedly requested removing your failures of selection by
the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011, 2012 and 2013 Master Sergeant
Selection Boards.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 11 April 2013. 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,
reguiations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the -
report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation
_ Review Board (PERB), dated 29 June 2012, and the PERB memorandum
-dated 8 January 2013, copies of which are attached. The Board
also considered the e-mail on your behalf from Master Gunnery
Sergeant J--- dated 15 October 2012 with attachment (undated
statement from Master Sergeant S---) and your e-mail dated 5
October 2012 (identifying Master Gunnery Sergeant J---).
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish probable material error or injustice.
The Board substantially concurred with the report of the PERB.
except to note your application did not. request raising the mark
in section K.3 (reviewing officer’s “Comparative Assessment”) .
The Board did not find the e-mail from Master Gunnery Sergeant
J--- with attachment to be persuasive. The Board found that
your failure of selection by the FY 2011 promotion board should
stand, because the fitness report at issue was not in your
record for that board, which convened on 19 October 2010; nor
was it due when that board convened, as the period ended well
after the convening date. 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; and the
RS‘s letter and the RO’s endorsement were not submitted until
after the board had convened on 18 October 2011, so they could
not have been considered. The Board was unable to find undue
administrative delay in the submission of this correspondence.
Finally, the Board found that your FY 2013 failure of selection.
- should stand, as the Board found insufficient basis to modify
your fitness report record, and you had the opportunity to
submit the RS’s letter and the RO’s endorsement to the promotion
board, which convened on 17 October 2012. 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.
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.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are éntitled 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 ali 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,
Rene >. {men
ROBERT D. ' Z2SALMAN
Acting Executive Director -
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07967-02
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure applicable naval record be corrected by removing his fitness report for 1 October 2000 to 3 1 July 2001, a copy of which is at Tab A to enclosure (1). fifth highest, in F.3 ( “setting the ” the reviewing officer ” the g. Petitioner provided a supporting letter dated 30 April 2002 (Tab E to enclosure (1)) from the RS who submitted the contested transfer fitness...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03186-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 May 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 | CY2014 | NR4256 14
You requested modifying the fitness reports for 13 June 2010 to 31 March 2011 and 1 April to 22 August 2011 in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS‘’s) letter dated 1 May 2013 and the reviewing officer’s (RO’s) endorsement dated 3 May 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, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08495-07
He may submit to HQMC (NMPR-2) a request for remedial consideration for promotion on the basis of the PERB action and the further action recommended by this Board, if it is approved.2. In enclosure (3) , Petitioner maintains that the RO’s letter fully justifies removing the report for 2 March to 30 June 2003.CONCLUSION:Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and notwithstanding enclosure (2), the Board finds an injustice warranting complete removal of the report for 2...
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 | 09228-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 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 | CY2012 | 03443 12
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S,. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by completely removing the fitness report for 18 June 2007 to 31 May 2008 (copy at Tab A), modified in his previous case by the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) by removal of section K...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05700-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 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 | CY2014 | NR8716 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 September 2014. 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 | 03147-11
Petitioner further requested removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) entry dated 19 March 2008, a copy of which is at Tab F. Finally, he requested setting aside the Commandant Of the Marine Corps (CMC)'s revocation dated 8 July 2008 of his selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 First Sergeant Selection Board and promoting him to first sergeant with the lineal precedence he would have had, but for the revocation. The PERB report at enclosure (2) stated that...