DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BIG
Docket No: 5675-08
11 December 2008
This ig 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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 11 December 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
advisory opinion from the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC)
Military Law Branch, Judge Advocate Division (JAM3), dated
31 March 2008, and the report of the HQMC Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB), dated 5 June 2008, copies of which are
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 advisory opinion
from JAM3 and the report of the PERB. The Board was unable to
find you were poorly advised as to whether it would be in your
best interest to exercise your right to refuse nonjudicial
punishment and demand trial by court-martial. 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,
W. DEAN PFEI
Executive Di
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 | CY2007 | 03844-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 August 2008. 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. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08244-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 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 | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Dec 28 08_34_06 CST 2000
Petitioner’s application which requests that the entry reflecting his nonjudicial punishment (NJP) of 30 August 1996 be removed from his official records. He received two adverse fitness reports during this period, from two different Reporting Seniors and Reviewing Officers. Petitioner’s Regimental Commander also Petitioner was found guilty of that offense b. Petitioner provides no basis for removal of the record of NJP.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10209-07
10209-07 25 January 2008This is in reference to your applicationfor correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 2008. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC), dated 30 November 2007, and the e-mail from the HQMC Performance...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03565-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 September 2012. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) dated 27 March 2012 and the advisory opinions from HQMC dated 24 May 2012 with enclosure and 6 July 2012 with references (b), (d), (e) and (£), copies of which are attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05816-01
Board has directed that your Naval record will be removing therefrom the following fitness report: Having reviewed all the facts of the Performance 1610.11C, Evaluabion injubtice in re/cord, the correkted by Date of Report Reporting Senior Period of Report 12 May 97 960406 to 9701516 (EN) The memorandum will contain There will be inserted in your Naval record a memorandum in place of the removed report. also claims he was denied effective counsel failed to object at specific points during...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11045-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2008. The Board did not consider removing your NJP, as you did not specifically request this. 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 | 09812-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2008. The Board found the adverse combat fitness report cited in the advisory opinion made your selection definitely unlikely, even if your record not only had been purged of the contested report whose removal has been directed, but also included the later filed combat fitness report for 2 May to 19 August 2007. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03840-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 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...