Ae
Oca
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS _
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DCG 20370-5100
BIG
Docket No: 11554-0959
24 December 2009
This 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 removal of the Headquarters Marine Corps Routing
Sheet (NAVMC HO 335 Rev. 06-03) dated 13 June 2005 with
enclosures.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 17 December 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,
dated 21 October 2009, a copy of which is attached. The Board
also considered your rebuttal letter dated 2 December 2009 and
your two e-mails dated 2 December 2009, both with attachments.
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. The Board noted that the dismissal by civil
authorities of charges against you did not establish that no
misconduct had occurred. The Board was unable to find the
contested material was incorrect in stating you entered a
guilty plea, noting that enclosure (6) to the Report of
Disposition for Misconduct dated 3 March 2005 supports this
statement. Finally, the Board found the advisory opinion
correctly cited Marine Corps Order P1070.12K, paragraph 4.c,
for the provision that all relevant “adverse matter,” defined
as “Any document that reflects unfavorably upon a Marine’s
mental, moral or professional qualifications,” is filed in the
Official Military Personnel File, subject to rules stated
elsewhere in the paragraph. 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,
\ QoS
W. DEAN P
Executive tor
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12000-08
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 22 January 2009 and 26 February 2009 with enclosures, copies of which are attached. In this regard, the Board noted that the favorable advisory opinion dated 22 January 2009 did not acknowledge the information reflected in enclosures (2), (3), (4) and (9) of the advisory opinion dated 26 February 2009. Reserve Affairs reiterates (as previously stated in the advisory opinion dated 16 May...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02503-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 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 | CY2009 | 09809-09
You further requested that these reports, as well as the report for 31 October 2007 to 30 June 2008, be modified by adding, to section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “MRO [Marine reported on] meets Physical Evaluation criteria in MCO [Marine Corps Order] 6100.12, and is within standards.” Finally, you requested removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year 2010 Active Reserve Colonel Selection Board, and granting you special selection board consideration...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06256-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 December 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion, from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 11 June 2009, 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 | CY2009 | 08554-09
The Board further concurred with the advisory opinion in = concluding your selection by the FY 2010 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board would have been definitely unlikely, even if your record had not included the fitness report CMC has directed removing. request, a Although the Board voted not to modify the fitness report for i July 2005 to 21 June 2006, you may submit the RS’s letter and the RO’s endorsement to future selection boards. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00224-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your — application on 23 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...
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 | CY2009 | 04984-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2009. The Board was unable to find that the command's correspondence with MMPR-2 dated 4 December 2005, recommending a four-month delay of your promotion, was based on anything other than the NUP, noting that the appeal of your NUP was not denied until 1 December 2005. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
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 | CY2010 | 11168-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the Board's file on your prior case (docket number 4974-10), your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. However, the Board particularly noted the figures provided in paragraph 3 of the advisory opinion, as well as the uncontested derogatory service record page 11 entries dated 14 November 1993 and 21 March, 24 March and 15 November...