DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 6069-08
21 May 2009
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 correction of
your naval record to show you were promoted to first sergeant in
1976 or 1977 and sergeant major three years later. You further
requested removing the fitness reports for June 1972 to February
1977 from the Military Police Company, Camp Pendleton,
California.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 21 May 2009. 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 Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC), dated
22 October 2008, and the report of the HOMC Performance
Evaluation Review Board (PERB) dated 23 March 2009, copies of
which are attached, and your letters of 1 October 2008 with
enclosures and 1 November 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 report of the PERB. The Board was unable to
DW
find you had a personality conflict with any of your reporting
seniors because of your post traumatic stress disorder, nor
could it find any of your fitness reports to have been unjustly
downgraded because of such a conflict. 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,
\ahenteh., 19
W. DEAN PFRIF E
Executive e&xtior
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00839-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested fitness report for 10 January to 28 February 2006 by restoring the mark in section A, item 6.b (“Derogatory Material”) whose removal CMC had directed in your previous case, docket number 5661-08; removing, from the section D.1 (“Performance”) justification, “MRO [Marine reported on] was relieved of duties for violating Depot Order P1510.30L on three separate occasions.” and “because on another...
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 | CY2008 | 07403-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2009. 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 material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02972-01
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has modified the contested fitness report for 9 June to 19 August 1997 by directing that the following be removed from the reviewing officer’s comments: “After a longer baseline of observation and much closer scrutiny, I am convinced that my previous RevO [reviewing officer] comments -- based on thirty days of personal observation and vastly conflicting reports from MRO [Marine reported on]’s enlisted and officer leadership -- were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02949-08
Documenta of your applicati support thereof, regulations and p report of the HQM dated 21 March 20 Enlisted Promotio gy the contested fitness report for mil.e (“Grade”), “20031001 [1 October in executive session, considered your C Performance Evaluation Review Board n Section (MMPR-2), dated 27 June 2008 April 2007 by changing the entry in section A, ignment”) from “Supply Chief” to “Supply aArters Marine Corps (HQMC) has further A of the report by entering “GYSGT [gunnery 2003)" in ate of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01480-10
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 5 February 2010, a copy of which is attached, and your letter dated 25 March 2010 with enclosures. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05157-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 2009. 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 | CY2014 | NR5301 14
You requested completely removing the fitness reports for 21 June to 31 December 2008 and 1 January to 8 May 2009. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 9 April 2014, a copy of which is attached. 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 | 10207-08
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 | CY2001 | 01877-00
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has amended your contested fitness report for 4 March to 29 August 1996 to show that you received a letter of appreciation. The Board C . The petitioner's disclaimer to proper counseling has not In this regard, the Board Reference (b) governs a totally separate program from been documented or otherwise proven.