DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JSR
Docket No: 11693-10
3 March 2011
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, that your naval record be corrected,
in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS's) letter dated 21
June 2010, by modifying the fitness report for 31 March to 6
October 2008 by raising the marks in sections D.2
(“Proficiency”) and E.3 (“Initiative”) from “Cc” (fifth best of
seven possible marks) to “D” (fourth best) and G.2 (“Decision
Making Ability”) and G.3 (“Judgment”) from “B” (sixth best) to
“co”, modifying the report for 1 January to 8 May 2009 by raising
the mark in section D.2 from “C” to “D”; and modifying the
reports for 14 August to 31 December 2009 and 1 January to 6 May
2010 by raising the marks in sections E.1 (“Courage”), E.2
(“Effectiveness under Stress”), E.3, G.2 and G.3. from “C’ te
“D." You also requested that the service record page 11
counseling entry dated 21 November 2008 be modified by deleting
the following:
Your demonstrated lack of maturity, judgment and
decision making abilities, specifically your
inappropriate sexual relationship with a CPL [corporal]
[pay grade E=-4}(fthen a PFC [private first class) [pay
grade E-2] when it started). You perpetuated this
relationship, while a SNCO [staff noncommissioned
officer] and Drill Instructor at MCRD [Marine Corps
Recruiting District] San Diego, CA when you moved in
with this junior Marine and her sister to inelude
signing a lease with her. This inappropriate sexual
relationship resulted in a child. On numerous
occasions, you were not forthcoming regarding the
extent of the inappropriate sexual relationship with
this junior Marine.
You further requested deleting “by the LCPL [lance corporal
[lance corporal] [pay grade E-3]’s command”; “entered into with
this junior Marine” and “entered into with this LCPL.”
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has
directed the; requested modifications of the fitness reports for
14 August to 31 December 2009 and 1 January to 6 May 2010.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 3 March 2011. 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
Fvaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 20 October 2010, and the
advisory opinions from HQMC dated 23 November and 28 December
2010, copies of which are attached, as well as your e-mail dated
2 November 2010 with attachment.
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
and the advisory opinions. 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.
Although the Board voted not to modify either of the fitness
reports for 31 March to 6 October 2008 and 1 January to 8 May
2009, you may submit the RS‘s letter to future selection boards.
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. ko PFEIFVE
Executive Dikec e
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04072-00
You again request that this fitness report be removed, and you add a new request for consideration by a special selection board for promotion to lieutenant colonel. petitioner alleges that senior officers, career counselors, and at least one monitor, him of fair consideration for command, promotion, and school selection. record and FYOl 0 and Subsequently, he Senior fitness requests removal of In our opinion, removing the petitioned report would have 3. significantly increased the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 08548 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2012. 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 | 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 | 08538-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 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 | CY2011 | 03202-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 2011. 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 | 11428-10
You requested modifying the fitness report for 1 October 2009 to 28 January 2010 by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's comments), the comment “SNM [subject named Marine] does not possess the mental dexterity required to lead Marines in extremely challenging environments.” In the alternative, you requested completely removing the contested report. CMC further directed removing, from page 2 of your statement dated 20 February 2010, the following: “I do possess the mental...
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 | 07740-08
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 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 | 11681-10
You requested, in effect, that the fitness report for 2 June to 12 August 2009 be modified, in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS’s) letter dated 16 April 2010 and the reviewing officer's (RO’s) letter dated 20 April 2010, by raising the marks in sections D.1 (“Performance”), F.1 (“Leading Subordinates”) and F.3 (“Setting the Example”) from “D” (fourth best of seven possible marks) to “E” (third best) and section G.1 (“Professional Military Education”) from "C” (fifth best) fo...
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.