DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
CRS
Docket No: 7150-00
8 March 2001
Dear
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 7 March 2001. 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 advisory
opinion furnished by the Awards Branch, Headquarters Marine
Corps, dated 10 January 2001, a copy of which is attached.
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
I'
-
i
' DEPARTMENT O F THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22 1 3 4 - 5 1 0 3
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj: BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF FORMER
I_
he recommendation was for- -
- - --
1. A review of his records, those of this Headquarters, the Navy
Departmen't Board of Decorations and Medals indicate that on 28 October
1973, the Commanding Officer, Marine Barracks, U.S. Naval Station,
Annapolis, Maryland, recommende
Medal for his service on March 2u
warded through the chain of command to the Commandant of the Marine
Corps for approval. On 19 June 1973, the Commandant approved the
awarding of a Commandant of the Marine Corps Certificate of
Commendation to him. Subsequently, the award recommendation was
referred to the Navy Department Board of Decorations and Medals for
final review. That Board concurred with the Commandant's decision to
award a Certificate of Commendation to then Corporal-
for the Navy Commendation
2. Once an award has been considered, and reviewed by boards and the
awarding authority, the decision becomes final. Subsequent reviews,
including those as provided for by Subtitle C, Section 526 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, are warranted
only when the officer who originated the recommendation or another
officer who has personal, first hand, knowledge of the Marine's
actions, submits new and relevant information, which was not available
at the time the original award recommendation was considered. In his
case there is no basis to warrant reconsideration.
3. It is a f ulir~ion of the delegated authority a w a r u s t c l a l i r o to E L ~ J U -
dicate the degree of heroism or meritorious service in each instance
and their recommendation for approval of a specific award is based
upon the service described in the recommendation.
4 . Many recommendations for various decorations when studied are
found to warrant a higher or lower award than recommended. From com-
parison of recommendations, the final awarding authority is in a
position to determine the degree of heroism or meritorious service
performed in each instance.
ards Branch
P e r s o ~ e l ~ a n a ~ e m e n t Division
By direction of the
Commandant of the Marine Corps
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 07733-00
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 material error or injustice. A review of his service and medical records, and the records at this Headquarters fails to reveal any documentation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05978-03
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 19 August 2003, a copy of which is attached. The BOI also substantiated misconduct or moral or professional dereliction as evidenced by the commission of military or civilian offenses, which, if prosecuted under the UCMJ, could be punished by six months or more, or would require proof of specific intent for conviction. The BOI recommended Petitioner's retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01120-01
From available information and the guidance delineated in the enclosure, authority acted appropriately in the revocation of the Joint Service Commendation Medal in the case of Staff Sergeant any Defense decoration for a or service may be revoked if it appears the awarding Since this is a Department of Defense awards issue, it is 2. recommended that this case be directed to that agency for an advisory opinion. Any Defense decoration for a distinguished act, achievement, or service may be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00229-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 March 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. 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 | CY2002 | 03975-01
Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) concurred with the board of generals and denied the recommendation of your former CO. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found no evidence that would warrant rcV1l. Subsequently, the Commandant determined, after reviewing the Consequently, no further action can be taken. the awarding authority, reviews, including those as provided for by Subtitle C, Section 526 of the National Defense Authorization Act for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01118-01
It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has removed the duplicate copy of your fitness report for 31 December 1986 to 26 May 1987 and modified this report, as you requested, by adding the reviewing officer's comments. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 8 February 2001, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00860-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 2003. 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 reenlistment code was assigned based on his overall record and means that he was not recommended for reenlistment at the time of separation.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03156-01
You also made new requests to remove your relief for cause from recruiting duty, which was requested on 5 April 1999; your nonjudicial punishment of 29 March 1999; and your service record page 11 counseling entries dated 17 and 24 February 1999. We are asked to provide an advisory opinion on Petitioner's request for the removal from his Service Record Book (SRB) and his official military personnel file (OMPF) of all references to his nonjudicial punishment (NJP) of 29 March 1999 and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00146-02
in the report of the PERB in concluding no correction of your fitness report record was warranted. Removal of the following fitness reports was requested: a. Lieutenant Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) denied his request for removal of the Annual fitness reports of 960801 to 970731 and 970801 to 980731. ailed selection on the FY-02 USMC on Board.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00218-01
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. 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. is nothing to indicate that the report is I b.