DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No: 11633-08
19 March 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 completely removing the fitness report for
1 April to 12 October 2007. It is noted that the Commandant of
the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested
report by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed
and Additional Comments”), “Directed Comment, Sect[ion] A, Item
6B [“Derogatory Material”]: The MRO [Marine reported on]
received a Page 11 Entry for lying.” and, from the third officer
sighting, “and a Page 11 entry.” CMC further directed that the
mark be removed from section A, item 6.b.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 19 March 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
report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation
Review Board (PERB), dated 25 November 2008, and the memorandum
for the record dated 18 March 2909, 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 report of the PERB.
Accordingly, your application for relief beyond that effected by
CMC 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 PFET
Executive Di r
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12295-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report by removing the mark from section A, item 6.b (“Marine Subject Of: Derogatory Material”); removing, from section I (RS’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “Derogatory: Directed Comment, Sect[ion] A, Item 6b: MRO [Marine reported on] has a page ll entry for being arrested and conduct not in keeping with standards expected for an NCO [noncommissioned officer].”; and removing, from your...
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 | CY2010 | 09823-10
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested reports for 11 March to 15 July 2009 and 1 August to 30 September 2009; and modifying the report for 1 October 2008 to 10 March 2009 by removing the mark in section A, item 6.c (“Disciplinary Action”) and removing, from the third sighting officer’s comments, “SNM [Subject named Marine] has been the subject of numerous Human Factor Boards and Stan [standardization] Boards; all recommendations from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5184 14
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the contested report for 1 July to 12 December 2008 by changing the date in section A, item 3.b (beginning date) from *20080701" to “20081002” {and filing in your record an administrative filler for 1 July to 1 October 2008} and modifying the report for 13 December 2008 to 19 May 2009 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed ana Additional Comments”), all but the first sentence and in section K...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12296-09
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 this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB, except the Board was persuaded that the reporting senior’s portion of the original version of a superseded version of the contested fitness report for 3 October 2007 to 30 September...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03147-11
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 | CY2008 | 10785-08
[physical fitness test] is removing, from section I “Directed and Additional Comments”), “- the semi-annual PFT of concern as”; Section A, Item 5.a Fitness report rendered adverse as a function of assigament to Body Composition Program [BCP] [Marine Corps Or (MCO P6100.12) .” Item 7.b. Documentany 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. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00377 12
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 March 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 of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06881-99
They were unable to find how, if at all, his report influenced your nonjudicial punishment or your removal from the 1998 staff sergeant selection list, nor could they find how he changed his opinions following the review of his report by the CO. We reviewed Sergeant documents concerning his Administrative Remarks page 11 entries dated 980804 and 981125, Offenses and Punishment page 12 entry dated 990311 and CMC letter 1450/3 MMPR-2 dated 2. In view of the above, it is recommended...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06764-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2008. In addition, the Board considered the undated report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), 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.