DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
MC
BJG
Docket No:
2 June 2000
1862-00
Dear Gunnery Serg
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.
Your request for a two-year “refresher tour” was not considered, as the Board for Correction
of Naval Records (BCNR) does not involve itself in assignment matters.
A three-member panel of the BCNR, sitting in executive session, considered your application
on 1 June 2000. 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.
Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 5 April 2000, a copy of which is attached. They also
considered your rebuttal letter dated 9 May 2000 with enclosure.
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by
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. They did not accept your assertion, in the first endorsement on your
letter of 9 May 2000, that the Commander, Sixth Marine Corps Recruiting District did not
measure the incident for which you received nonjudicial punishment against your record as a
whole. 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,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROA
D
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA
22 134-5 103
REPLY REFER TO:
IN
161 0
MMEA
05 APR
?&IO
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
E CASE OF GUNNERY
SERGEAN
Ref:
(a)
MC0
1100.76D, (Career Recruiter Program)
The package has been reviewed and Gy
1.
reinstate his selection to Master Sergeant
PMOS 8412 with special duty allowance is not recommended.
following justification is provided.
request to
with back pay, and his
The
a.
GySgt
d is not recommended to be reinstated to
the rank of Master Sergeant in accordance with the reference, as
his selection was in the 8412 career recruiter PMOS and not in
Because of his relief for cause and
his former MOS as a 6531.
subsequent voidance of his PMOS, he is not authorized to retain
the rank of Master Sergeant upon reverting to his former 6531
MOS.
determination for promotion,
and enlisted Marines
allocations.
GySgt
his o
GySgt
forme
remedial promotion.
d&. a
tes consideration for promotion within his
due
Although a Marine's entire record is considered in
was selected for promotion based on
mance within his PMOS of 8412. If
allocations by PMOS are authorized
ete within their PMOS for those
then he should submit for
to time in grade,
co
8412 reinstate
's- not recommended to have his PMOS of
ial duty allowance back pay.
GySSt
relieved for cause on 16 August 1999.
n recruiting duty since June 1992 and
r recruiter since January 1995.
He was relieved
for malpractice-interceding in legal matters
received NJP at the recruiting station level.
relief for cause package was initiated by his
sent to MCRC with a
return to his former 6531 MOS.
r/l
recom endation to void his 8412 PMOS and
and
S
C .
In accordance with the reference, CG MCRC has the final
authority to relieve career recruiters, and MMEA retains final
approval authority for PMOS voidance.
relief for cause package, it was determined th
had spent an inordinate amount of time out of
ordnance MOS
(7 years) and might have diminished technical
MMEA recommended disapproval of the voidance of his 8412
skills.
PMOS and retention within MCRC in a non-production recruiter
capacity.
revisited and routed to the General Officer level for final
MCRC disagreed with this decision and the package was
irector PMD), approved the voidance
S and recommended assignment within
based on the needs of the Marine Corps.
2.
Based on the above justifications there
arbitrary decisions made in the voidance of
8412 and his subsequent revocation of
Sergeant in that MOS.
selection to Master
r
MOS
We recommend approval of the request for a minimum of two
3.
years time on station at his current unit.
with
length requirements.
MC0
P1300.8R, Marine Corps Personnel Assignment Policy, tour
This is in compliance
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06191-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 15 March to 14 August 2000, a copy of which is at enclosure (1). The Board, consisting of Messrs. Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 15 August 2001, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03192-06
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 from Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 7 June 2006, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01263-01
That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 1 lb (“Administrative Remarks (1070)“) entry dated 23 February 2000. The Automated n Since your request to remove the Page 11 entry does not 3. fall under the purview of this Headquarters, your case will be forwarded to the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) for resolution 0 to that agency a lease direct further inquiries HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS DEPARTMENT OF THE 3280 RUSSELL...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05473-00
(6), the M arine Corps Recruiting Command ’s request to remove his page 11 entry should be MOS , and 2 In correspondence attached as enclosure (7), the HQMC Enlisted Assignment Branch (MI&A) has also commented to the effect that Petitioner ’s request to remove his page 11 entry should be approved, but his requests concerning his RFC should be denied. Point of contact is M ecommended that the Board equest for removal of the VMC 118(11), page 11 .entry dated Acting Head, Field Support...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04798-02
"in zone" population, two opportunity for promotion may g. USMC, RAP-36, the office responsible for establishing the promotion criteria for the active reserve master sergeants recommended that the each Marine erroneously considered in the "below enclosure (2). MC0 j. Petitioner then submitted a request to the Board for Correction of Naval Records requesting consideration for promotion to E-8 before an Enlisted Remedial Selection Board alleging that he was only given a 41.6% opportunity when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08183-00
Your request to change your sergeant date of rank to 9 October 1998 was not considered, as the Marine Corps Total Force System already reflects that date. 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. However, they sa 9 his date of rank is MCRC; that MCRC set his date of rank as 1 Jan 95; and that unless BCNR rules otherwise, MMPR-2...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05798-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure applicable naval record be corrected by removing the fitness report for 1 November 1992 to 15 January 1993. ’s e. Concerning the incident for which he received NJP, Petitioner states that while he was attending a recruiting conference with a Marine Corps gunnery sergeant (pay grade E-7) and master sergeant (pay grade E-8), the three of them went out on liberty;...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5624 14
Pursuant to its regulations, the Board determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. His transfer fitness report from RS Harrisburg, for 1 January to 13 July 2013 (copy at enclosure (1)), was fully favorable, even though the reporting senior, the Commanding Officer (CO), RS Harrisburg, requested Petitioner’s RFC on 12 April 2013, and the reviewing officer, the CO, First Marine Corps District, favorably endorsed the request on 26...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Wed Nov 29 14_53_31 CST 2000
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 1999. In addition, the Board 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 warranting restoration of your drill instructor military occupational specialty (MOS) or your special duty assignment (SDA) pay. ...
USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-01012
MD00-01012 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000830, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. It was too severe by today's standards.” The Board found that the applicant was counseled on 4 separate occasions, received a non-punitive Letter of Caution, a Letter of Probation and was awarded CO’s NJP for 4 specifications of disobeying a lawful order and 2 specifications of making a false official statement. The...