DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51900
JSR
Docket No: 4010-10
10 June 20100
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, in effect, removing the fitness report for 3
November 2007 to 6 March 2008; removing documentation of your
relief for cause (RFC) from drill instructor (DI) duty;
restoring your DI additional military occupational specialty of
0911; restoring your special duty assignment pay terminated on
22 April 2008; and removing, from the Marine Corps Total Force
System, the draw case code “AM” (relieved from DI duty).
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has directed
removing the contested fitness report.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 June 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 (HOMC) Performance
Evaluation Review Board (PERB) dated 6 April 2010, the advisory
opinion furnished by HQMC dated 1 June 2010, and the e-mail from
the HOMC Performance Evaluation Review Branch dated 15 April
2010, 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. Notwithstanding the advisory opinion dated
1 June 2010, the Board found the RFC should stand. In this
regard, the Board found that the basis for setting aside your
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) of 6 March 2008 did not invalidate
the finding, in the NJP proceedings, that you had committed the
offense of driving while under the influence of alcohol, with a
blood alcohol content of .19. The Board concluded that the RFC
was supported by the finding of misconduct, without the NUP. 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,
whan
'W. DEAN PREF
Executive Dil r
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07838-10
JAMS stated that the NUP “stemmed from [Petitioner’s] failure to report a civilian DUI arrest,” however, the UPB entry actually says he was punished “for failing to notify his command of his DUI conviction [emphasis added] .” JAM5 noted that “the requirement to report the conviction (rather than the arrest) is lawful.” d. Enclosure (4) explains that PERB directed removing the contested fitness report in light of enclosure (3). e. In enclosure (5), the Marine Corps Recruiting Command (MCRC)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06632-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2008. 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 | CY2012 | 02280 12
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 30 March 2009, a copy of which is at Tab A. That his record be corrected further to restore his AMOS of 8411. c. That his record be corrected further to show his entitlement to SDA pay for 21 July 2010 to 13 June...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0776 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2014. 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 advisory opinion in finding your RFC should not be set aside,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2083 14
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting removal of derogatory material, specifically, a nonjudicial punishment (NIP) dated 18 June 2010, an undated administrative remarks (page 11) entry, an adverse Fitness Report (FITREP), and documentation regarding Relief For Cause (RFC), from her naval record. Enclosure (3) applies, 2. pine Board, consisting cf iii reviewed Petitioner's allegations of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00093-10
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. 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 | CY2010 | 02819-10
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing documentation of his relief for cause (RFC) from recruiting duty. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Grover, Ivins and McBride, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 1 July 2010, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5624 14
Pursuant to its regulations, the Board determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. His transfer fitness report from RS Harrisburg, for 1 January to 13 July 2013 (copy at enclosure (1)), was fully favorable, even though the reporting senior, the Commanding Officer (CO), RS Harrisburg, requested Petitioner’s RFC on 12 April 2013, and the reviewing officer, the CO, First Marine Corps District, favorably endorsed the request on 26...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06325-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 2009. In this regard, the Board noted that the recommendation, in the MCRC advisory opinion dated 3 September 2008, to remove this documentation gave no basis for concurring with your request. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07739-08
You also initially requested modifying the reports for 13 October 1998 to 23 April 1999 and 1 January to 15 June 2007, but you telephonically indicated on 18 July 2008 that you were satisfied with complete removal of these reports, which has been directed by the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2008. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...