DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No: 3844-07
13 August 2008
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, removing the fitness report for 1 June
to 27 July 2005 and 25 July 2005 to 14 February 2006, the
nonjudicial punishment of 25 January 2006, and all documentation
of your proceedings before a board of inquiry.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 7 August 2008. 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
reports of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance
Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 24 April 2007 and
11 March 2008, and the advisory opinion from the HOMC Military
Law Branch, Judge Advocate Division (JAM3), dated
4 September 2007, copies of which are attached. The Board also
considered your counsel’s letter dated 27 August 2007 with
enclosure, your letter dated 9 November 2007, Lieutenant Colonel
H---‘s letter of 16 March 2008, the Commanding Officer, Marine
Fighter Attack Training Squadron's letter dated 25 March 1988,
and Lieutenant Colonel K---'‘s letter dated 30 March 2008.
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 reports of the PERB
and the JAM3 advisory opinion. The Board was unable to find the
officer who conducted the investigation underlying your
nonjudicial punishment had a conflict of interest or was biased
against you. The Board was likewise unable to find the
investigation reflected misleading information, or that your
command relied on treatment decisions of medical personnel not
authorized to make such decisions. 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.
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,
\ SQ teal
W. DEAN PFENRFE
Executive Dikéctér
Enclosures
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04433-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions from the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Manpower Information Operations, Manpower Management Information Systems Division (MIO), dated 16 April 2008 with enclosure, and the HQMC Military Law Branch, Judge Advocate Division (JAM3), dated 28 April 2008, and the report of the HQMC Performance...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06678-06
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 2O370 -5100BJGDocket No: 6678-0617 November 2005This 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 removing the fitness reports for 1 June 2004 to 9 May 2005 and 9 May to 30 June 2005, as well as your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.It...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02719-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100BJGDocket No:2719-0725 June 2007This is in reference to your letter dated 14 March 2007 with enclosures requesting 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 17 August to 31 December 2004 be modified by changing section I (reporting senior (RS) comments) to reflect “Promote at soonest...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06711-08
[Petitioner] was involuntarily discharged from the Marine Corps with an honorable characterization of service and has been on continuous active duty since October 1994 until her separation. Accordingly, we recommend that [Petitioner's] request for separation [sic] be denied. Furthermore, the law and regulations allow commanders to recommend separation of commissioned officers without the recommendation of a BOI when they have less than five years of active duty service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05675-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2008. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07162-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 July 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07414-08
This is in naval reco United Sta You requeste May 2006 ar Year (FY) 40 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JSR Docket No: 7414-08 4 September 2008 reference to your application for correction of your d pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the es Code, section 1552. d removal of the fitness report for 6 April to 31 hd all documentation of your removal from the Fiscal 07 Lieutenant Colonel Promotion List; reinstatement to that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06266-10
Your previous request, docket number 12841-09, again seeking to remove the original fitness report and replace it with the revised report, or just remove the original report, and remove your failures of selection to lieutenant colonel, which then included failures of selection by the FY 2005 and 2006 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards, was administratively closed on 25 May 2010. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, reconsidered...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03855-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 2008. The Board found no requirement for a page 11 entry, regarding your promotion revocation, in MCO P1400.32C, the applicable version of the Enlisted Promotions Manual (this requirement appears in paragraph 1204.5 of MCO P1400.32D, dated 11 May 2006). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 10223-05
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100BJGDocket No:10223-0516 April 2007This 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 1 October 2000 to 31 May 2001 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS’s) letter dated 3 January 2005, by raising the marks in sections...