DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490
HD:hd
Docket No. 05470-11
2 February 2012
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, correcting your naval record by removing
alcohol-related issues and reflecting your advancement to HM1 (pay
grade E-6). You also impliedly requested removing all record of your
administrative separation proceedings and your enlisted performance
evaluation report for 26 April 2008 to 15 March 2009.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
2 February 2012. 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 and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the
advisory opinions furnished by the Chief of Naval Operations dated 5
July 2011 with attachments and the Navy Personnel Command dated 19
July 2011, 8 August 2011 and 10 August 2011 with attachment, copies of
which are attached. The Board also considered your counsel’s letter
dated 16 December 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. In
this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments
contained in the advisory opinions. The Board noted that your record
correctly reflects the result of your administrative separation
proceedings was retention. The Board was unable to find any material
error in the contested documentation. 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.
wr
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,
LB ow hey
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Dil
Enclosures
Copy to:
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04260-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2012. 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 | 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 | CY2014 | NR4746 14
A three-member panel of ‘the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof and applicable statutes, regulations and policies, In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board dated 2 April 2014, the e-mail from HQMC dated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2338 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2015. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 16 July and 4 December 2014, copies of which are 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 | CY2014 | NR8180 14
Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24. 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 error or...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8180 14
Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24. 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 error or...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00446-10
You finally impliedly requested removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") counseling entry dated 25 January 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. Further, the (enclosure Board was unable to find your promotion would not have been delayed, had the results of the inspection, which was conducted on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00070-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 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 | CY2013 | NR4717 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2014. in addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Boarg (PERB) dated 17 May 2013, the e-mail from HOMC dated 18 July 2013, and the advisory opinions furnished by HOMC dated 18 February 2014 with attachment (MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, Subject: Promotion Recommendation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2718 14
You requested completely removing the fitness reports for 23 June to 29 September 2011 and 1 January to 10 May 2012. It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps {CMC} has directed removing the contested report for 1 January to 10 May 2012 and modifying the report for 23 June to 29 September 2011 by changing the entry in section A, item 3.a (“Occasion”) from “pc” (directed by CMC) to “CD” (change of duty); changing the entry in section A, item @.d (height in inches) from 70 to...