Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07403-08
Original file (07403-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

JSR
Docket No: 7403-08
16 July 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 adjustment of your master sergeant date of rank
and effective date from 1 April 2008 to reflect selection by the
Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Master Sergeant Selection Board, rather

than the enlisted remedial selection board for the FY 2008
Master Sergeant Selection Board.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 16 July 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 opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) dated 27
February and 4 May 2009, copies of which are attached, and
copies of the HOMC MMER/PERB (Performance Evaluation Review
Board) memorandum dated 15 January 2009 and the fitness report

for 26 June 2004 to 6 May 2005, which has been removed from your
record by action of the HOMC PERB.

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. The Board was unable to find your selection
by the FY 2007 Master Sergeant Selection Board would have been
probable, even with a corrected record. In this regard, the
Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the
advisory opinion dated 4 May 2009. Accordingly, 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,

we

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Diractc

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05700-11

    Original file (05700-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 00883-10

    Original file (00883-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 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 | CY2008 | 05058-08

    Original file (05058-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 September 2008. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion, except to note your request was not for remedial consideration for promotion to master sergeant, but adjusting the date of rank and effective date of your promotion to reflect selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Master Sergeant Selection...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03147-11

    Original file (03147-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00413-09

    Original file (00413-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Copies of the ‘PERB memorandum directing that action and the two removed reports are at enclosure (2). He was selected by the FY 2008 Staff Sergeant Selection Board, the first board to consider him without the contested fitness reports, and promoted with a date of rank and effective date of 1 October 2008. d. In the advisory opinions at enclosure (3), MMPR-2, the HOMC Enlisted Promotion Section, recommends that relief be denied, as Petitioner did not exercise due diligence, and even his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10729-09

    Original file (10729-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    * 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 found that you offered nothing new and material regarding your transfer to the FMCR except your contention, in paragraph 5 of your letter dated 24 June 2009, that you submitted a request, never received by the HOMC. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07414-08

    Original file (07414-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2009 | 04512-09

    Original file (04512-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10584-07

    Original file (10584-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 October 2008. In this connection, the Board particularly noted that you were not selected when you received remedial consideration for promotion from the FY 2005 and 2006 Master Sergeant Selection Boards; and the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion dated 29 April 2008, except to note you actually had only one observed gunnery sergeant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10207-08

    Original file (10207-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...