DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 12023-08
12 February 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 completely removing the fitness report for 6
November 2007 to 8 February 2008. It is noted that the
Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the
contested report by removing, from the section F, item 3
(“Setting the Example”) justification, “(arrested for DUI
[driving under the influence])”; from the section G, items 2
(“Decision Making Ability”) and 3 (“Judgment”) justification,
“This decision by him led to his involvement in an alcohol
related incident (arrested for DUI)” and from section I
(reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”),
“(arrested for DUI) .”
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 12 February 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 9 December 2008, a copy of which is
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,
ed > fe
FAW. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosure
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 | 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 06544-08
[In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 30 June 2008, 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. The petitioner requests that this entire report be removed, or at least certain comments be expunged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12153-09
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 | CY2008 | 01269-08
The reporting period for this fitness report is April 1, 2004 to July 23, 2004. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 March 2008. 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 | 10350-08
concurred with the rd also considered your rebuttal letter dated ith enclosure. The Board could not find the reviewing officer (RO) lacked sufficient lobservation to evaluate you, noting observation need not be direct. 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 | CY2014 | NR9944 14
"; removing, from the justification for the mark in section G.3, “MRO received a 6105"; removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), Sect[ion] A, Item 6b: MRO received a 6105 for an alcohol related incident that occurred on 8 Nov 2013.” and removing, from section k.4 (reviewing officer's comments), *,imdicated in the 6105 counseling,”. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04688-00
Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removal of the following sentence from the reporting senior’s comments: “Makes up for lack of force and aggressiveness with dogged determination. They found that this sentence was inconsistent with the favorable marks in these areas, not, as you contend, that the sentence was the reporting senior ’s justification for lower than “OS” marks. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...