DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 &, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BJG
Docket No: 2391-14
10 June 2014
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. .
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 June 2014. 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 the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and entered active duty on 22
July 1996. You received two adverse fitness reports and failed
the physical fitness test (PFT). On 21 June 2009, you were
honorably discharged as a sergeant (pay grade E-5) due to non-
retention on active duty, and assigned a waivable RE-3P reentry
code.
You are advised that the service limitation for a. sergeant when
you were on active duty was 13 years. You had 12 years and 11
months of active duty service.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, prior
honorable service, and counsel’s request for reinstatement or an
upgrade of your reentry code. However, the Board found no basis
to reinstate you or change your reentry code based on your
adverse fitness reports, failure of the PFT, service limitation
for a sergeant, and non-recommendation for retention. You are
advised that a reentry code may not be routinely changed due
merely to the passage of time or post service good conduct. 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.
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,
pe >
ROBERT D. 4SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Copy to:
John A. Wickham, Esq.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4355 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2014. On 9 February 2010, you completed your active duty obligation in pay grade E-1, were honorably transferred to the Navy Reserve, and assigned an RE-4 (not. 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 | CY2003 | 04790-03
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PEW), dated 2 June 2003, a copy of which is attached. (6), concerning section A, item 8b (physical fitness test (PFT)) of the fitness report form, says "Use code 'NMED' [not medically qualified] if the MRO warine reported on] is unable to take or pass the PFT because of a physical (medical) condition." The "NMED" entry in Item 8b of the fitness report, whi.ch is further...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06696-02
Although the enlisted performance board initially recommended discharge, this decision was changed after you submitted evidence that you had met the weight standards. The fitness report for the period 13 September 1986 to 14 February 1987 states as follows:(He) is leaving the Marine Corps after nineteen years of dedicated service, including an extended tour in the Republic of Vietnam. Consequently, the Board concluded that a correction to your record to show that you retired from the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1301 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 July 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. 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 | CY1999 | Document scanned on Fri Nov 03 10_20_27 CST 2000
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has added your rebuttal statement to your contested adverse fitness report for 2 July to 28 September 1992, and removed references to your not having submitted a rebuttal. the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 3 November 1998, a copy of which is attached. in the report of the PERB in finding that your fitness report at issue should stand.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5246 14
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 §. The third sighting officer verified that Petitioner “did not complete a PFT IAW [in accordance with} the Physical Fitness Program.” d. In support of his application, Petitioner submitted a statement dated 12 December 2013 from the RO, recommending “in the strongest terms” that the contested fitness report be removed. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing the following fitness report and related...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9446 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded those factors were insufficient to warrant a change in the reentry code based on your non-recommendation for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01491-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 June 2001. !‘I FIB MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: ( ‘ Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR AP SERGE N THE CASE OF USMCR (a) (b) Sergea MC0 P1610.7D DD Form 149 of 13 w/Ch l-5 Ott 00 Per MC0 met on 21 February 2001 to consider 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04197-02
Report A - 990827 to 991231 (AN). Report C - 000630 to 001231 (AN). Evaluation Review Board, request for May 2002 to consider Staff removal of his fitness report for the period 010101 to 010209 Reference (b) is the performance evaluation directive (CH).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06850-01
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 Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 24 August 2001, a copy of which is attached. VIRGINIA 221 34-51 03 IN REPLY REFER TO: 0 161 MMER/PERB 2 2001 I AU6 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR...