DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JLP:tj
Docket No:
24 August 1999
1607-99
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 24 August 1999. 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.
opinion furnished by CMC Memorandum 1070 A of 3 August 1999, a copy of which is
attached.
In addition, the Board considered the advisory
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 opinion. Accordingly, 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,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosure
UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
MARINE CORPS RECRUITING COMMAND
QUANT~C~ VA 22134-5103
IN REPLY REPER TO
3 Aug 99
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj: —ADVISOP~Y OPINION IN THE CASE OF PRIVATE FIRST CLASS
Ref:
(a) BCNR Docket #01607—99
(b) MCO P1100.72
1.
~onse
to reference (a), we have reviewed
petition, OMPF, and the provisions of reference
(b) .
disapproved.
Based on our review, we recommend that his petition be
2
evidence of completing at least one full-time semester at a
nationally accredited college, and earning a minimum of 2.3 grade
point average on a 4.0 scale.
semester criteria, his GPA is not 2.3 or above.
Although he meets the full-time
did not provide sufficient
~‘~IN~4
Chief of Staff
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00713-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 1999. 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 | 06756-98
Retirement Policy which states that Marines in the grade of Gunnery Sergeant or above, must serve two years in their current pay grade prior to transfer to retirement status. 6756-98 Reference (a) requests an advisory opinion on Gunnery 1. Reference (a) requests an advisory opinion on Gunnery Sergeant petition with regard to his retirement rank.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00497-03
The Board was not persuaded that the contested fitness report was used as a counseling tool, nor could it find the reporting senior engaged in “blatant conjecture” by stating, in section G, that you were absent without authority on one occasion. Per subparagraph S001.3e of reference (b), a mark of unsatisfactory” in Item K3 does not constitute new adverse mateial when the Reporting Senior has already marked the Marine reported on adversely in one or more attributes in Sections D through H....
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01105-99
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. the PERB concluded that the report is a. Notwithstand' the statements of both the petitioner and there is no showing that the petitioner tunity to append an official rebuttal to When the petitioner acknowledged the adverse First Lieutenan was not afforde the fitness report. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02790-99
official military record, the fitness report 2. Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report: Date of Report Reportinu Senior Period of Re~ort 6 Jan 98 970701 to 971231 (TR) 2 . However, First Lieutenant record retains serious competitive concerns due to poor -istribution, less competitive Section B marks, and the Reviewing Officer's comments on the Annual fitness report of 960429...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Tue Jan 30 17_54_01 CST 2001
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 September 1999. Therefore, Warrant Officer Colemon did not warrant Marines in receipt of permanent change Staff Sergeant Lamie, the Marine 3. asserts was given preferential treatment, was approved for early reenlistment because he was complying with orders to recruiting duty. reenlistment in 1991. meet the requirements for an early reenlistment and his...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Tue Jan 30 16_58_29 CST 2001
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 September 1999. Therefore, Warrant Officer Colemon did not warrant Marines in receipt of permanent change Staff Sergeant Lamie, the Marine 3. asserts was given preferential treatment, was approved for early reenlistment because he was complying with orders to recruiting duty. reenlistment in 1991. meet the requirements for an early reenlistment and his...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Oct 12 10_38_11 CDT 2000
considered the advisory opinions furnished by HQMC, dated 24 May 1999, and the Marine Corps Recruiting Command, dated 12 July 1999, copies of which are attached. although Petitioner’s conviction was set aside, the underlying facts may nevertheless support Petitioner’s relief for cause. Once Petitioner’s record is cleansed of all references to his summary court—martial conviction, we conclude it would be appropriate for the Commandant of the Marine Corps to review the cleansed record to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Jan 25 09_58_26 CST 2001
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. At the outset, the Board stresses that the petitioner has References (b) not MCO P1610.7E as the argued the provisions of the incorrect directive. Succinctly stated, Lieutenant Colonej~~j& His limited To this end, the board discerns c. While the petitioner argues that the Reviewing...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05149-99
M&RA noted specifically that Petitioner's relationship with the On 23 June 1999, the petty officer Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) (ASN(M&RA)) directed Petitioner's discharge with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) character of service. this relief is neither available Accordingly, a Petitioner supports his request for an honorable characterization of service with essentially four arguments: b. one, his discharge was improper because it was not based on...