DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 5. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100%
APBLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JSR
Docket No: NR9781-14
30 October 2014
Dear
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 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 three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 30 October 2014. 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 20 August 2014, 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 recognized that the RS's letter was submitted less
than three months after the reporting period, but it was unable
to find the proposed revised marks were more fair and accurate
than the contested original marks. In this regard, the Board
particularly noted that you provided nothing from the reviewing
officer, who concurred with the original marks, to show that
officer supported the proposed revised marks. 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 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
evidence within one year from the date of the Board’s decision.
New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in this case. 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,
ROBERT J. O’NETLL
Executive Director
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 | CY2014 | NR5248 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 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 | CY2014 | NR5920 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navai Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2012 | 12463 12
You requested that the fitness report for 25 August 2008 to 30 June 2009 be modified, in accordance with.the reporting senior’s (RS’s) letter dated 18 June 2012, by raising the marks in . A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 2013. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10695 14
DErARIMWEMN! Ur the RAY T PAAR PARP FRM PFr Ee TION Ae NAN Se preompr 701 5, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100i ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Dear Master ‘
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1148 14
In addition, the Board considered the reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 23 January and i8 July 2014, copies of which are attached, and your letter dated 6 February 2014 with enclosures. 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 01201-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 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...