DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JRE
Docket No. 547-12
1 November 2012
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United
estates Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 25 October 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, your naval record and applicable
statutes, regulations and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that your application was not timely filed,
and that you have not demonstrated that it would be in the interest
of justice for the Board to excuse your failure to submit your
application in a timely manner. The Board noted that although you
claim you discovered the alleged error or injustice in 2011, you knew
on 12 August 1996, when you were honorably discharged from the Navy,
that you were not considered unfit for duty by reason of physical
disability. In addition, it noted that although you claim the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) granted your request for
service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder, records
obtained by the Board indicate that the VA denied your request
for service connection for that condition and seven others on
22 June 2011.
In view of the foregoing, your application has been denied.
The board did not consider your request for awards and
decorations as you have not exhausted an available
administrative remedy by submitting a request to the Commandant
of the Marine Corps for administrative correction of your
record.
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. Inthis 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,
; / ew (Bax ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
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 | CY2011 | 05523 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 January 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 | CY2010 | 04458-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 January 2011. As noted above, you were found fit for duty by the PEB, and you accepted that finding, which suggests that you felt that you were fit for duty at that time. 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 | CY2012 | 09913 12
You requested modifying the fitness report for 1 July to 24 October 2011, in accordance with the reporting senior’s (RS‘s) letter dated 10 July 2012 with enclosure, by raising the mark in section E.1 (“Courage”) from “C” (fifth best of seven possible marks) to “D” (fourth best), E.2 (“Effectiveness Under Stress” ) from "C” to “E” (third best) and F.5 (*Communication Skills”) from “D" to WE A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4761 14
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has Girected modifying the contested report for 28 April to 31 December 2011 by removing, from section K.4 (reviewing officer's (RO’s) comments), “MRO [Marine reported on] continues to develop and hone skills required to effectively support Special Operations Marines in combat operations.” and further directed removing the entire section K (RO’s marks and comments) from each of the other three reports at issue. A three-member panel...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00225 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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 | CY2012 | 01614 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 December 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 | CY2012 | 00084-12
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has directed modifying the report for 1 January to 12 May 2009 by removing, from section I (reporting senior’s “Directed and Additional Comments”), “Upon completion of his scheduled PME [Professional Military Education] .” 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05470-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2012. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03116-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on Ll March 2013. 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...