DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 0093-10
4 March 2010
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 removing the fitness reports for 3 May 2007 to 31
May 2008 and 1 June to 28 August 2008. You also requested
removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010
Major Selection Board. After you had submitted your
application, you failed of selection by the FY 2011 Major
Selection Board. It is presumed you desire removing that
failure of selection as well, and setting aside any action to
effect your discharge from the Marine Corps by reason of having
twice failed of selection to major.
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has
directed removing both contested fitness reports.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 4 March 2010. 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 (HQMC) Performance
Evaluation Review Board dated 25 November 2009 and the advisory
ob
opinion from HOMC dated 15 December 2009, 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. The Board found that your failures of
selection to major should stand. In this regard, the Board
substantially concurred with the comments contained in the
advisory opinion in concluding your selection by either
promotion board would have been definitely unlikely, had your
record not included either of the fitness reports at issue.
Gince the Board found insufficient grounds to remove either of
your failures of selection to major, it had no basis to
recommend setting aside any action to effect your discharge by
reason of those failures. In view of the above, 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,
Load
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di x
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9152 14
You requested completely removing the fitness report for 5 April to 30 November 2007, and you impliedly requested removing your failure of selection by the Fiscal Year (FY) 20615 Major Selection Board. In this regard, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinion in finding your selection by the FY 2015 promotion board would have been definitely unlikely, even if your record had reflected the modifications CMC has directed to the fitness report at issue. Consequently, when:...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06106-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable. 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 03374-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 2010. 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 warranting removal of your failure of selection by the FY 2010 Captain Selection Board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10175-08
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. Regarding the recommendation, in paragraphs 4.b.ii and 5 of the JAM5 advisory opinion, to amend the commanding officer’s/RO’s letter of 4 May 2006 (among the ericlosures to the HQMC routing sheet dated 10 October 2006) by removing the words “for his civilian conviction,” the Board noted that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03981-09
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 | CY2010 | 08487-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted im support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 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. Since the Board found insufficient basis to remove your failure of selection by the FY 2011...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09555-09
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed removing the contested fitness report for 25 November 2002 to 29 May 2003. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. 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 | CY2002 | 00955-00
The Board's opinion, 4. vote, is that Report A should remain a part of Captain official military record. Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the Directed by the Commandant of the Marine Corps fitness report of 980117 to 980904. failures of selection. Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) for removal of the Captain record and SMC Major he successfully petitioned the Duty fitness report of 940201 to 940731. requests removal of his failures of selection.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR475-13
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the fitness report in question as you requested. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 2013. 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 warranting removal of...