DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No:
17 August 2001
3521-00
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 9 August 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 opinions furnished by the Head, Separation and Retirement Branch,
Headquarters, USMC (HQMC) dated 20 September 2000, and the Assistant Head, Enlisted
Assignment Branch, HQMC, undated, 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 opinions. With regard to the issue of fitness for duty, it noted that you were
found fit for duty by the Physical Evaluation Board on 25 January 1999, and you accepted
that finding on 27 January 1999. The Board was not persuaded that the finding of fitness
was erroneous or unjust. The fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs has awarded you
disability rating is not probative of the existence of error or injustice, because that agency
awards ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty. 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
3280 RUSSELL ROA
22
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA
D
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
134-5 103
IN REPLY REFER TO:
176 0
MMSR-6J
20 Sep 00
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
CASE OF FORMER
Ref:
(a) MMER Route Sheet, Docket No. 3521-00 of
13SepOO
1.
Reference (a) requests an advisory opinion on former Sergeant
equest to have his records corrected to show that he was
not discharged from the Marine Corps on 27 May 1999, and to
further show that he is retired by reason of physical disability.
was discharged on 27 May 1999 after he was
2.
found fit for duty by the Physical Evaluation Board of the Naval
He states in his petition that he should have
Medical System.
received disability rating by that Board subsequently retired by
reason of physical disability.
was discharged under proper authority in
3.
accordance with current regulations based on the PEB findings.
Sergean-. petition and attached
We recommend that former
medical information be submitted to the Physical Evaluation Board
for review and further advisory opinion.
Head, Separation and
Retirement Branch
By direction
of the Marine Corps
of-the Commandant
HEADQUARTERS UNITED
OF
DEPARTMENT
8TAT2S MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROA
QUANTICO. VIRGINIA
T-HE
D
22134-5103
NAVY
REFER TO:
REPLY
IN
1000
MMEA
MEMORANDUM FOR THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
BCNR DOCKET NO. 3521-m CASE OF
,
1.
We have carefully reviewed
Medical Retirement from the
Unl
request for
arlne Corps.
in accordance with
Retention Manual.
Driving While Intoxicated (DWI),
fat standards as prescribed by
was disapproved for reenlistment on 22 March
ailed to meet three reenlistment prerequisites
Planning and
was convicted of
did not meet height/weight/ body
MC0 1040.31,
Specifically,
p current, passing Physical Fitness Test (PFT) score.
Nance failed to meet reenlistment prerequisites, he was
P1900.16,
Sergeant
authorized half separation pay in
Separation and Retirement Manual,
reenlistment eligibility code RE-3P because he did not meet
physical standards (not within weight standards).
accorance with
and appropriately assigned
MC0
MC0 6100.10, and did not have a
Because
3.
MMEA concurs with the recommendation made by
Mrs.
Jr., Head, Separation and Retirement Branch.
4.
Point of contact is Captain
at (703) 784-9238.
ASSlSTANT
HEAD,
EMLISTEJB
ASSIGNfVlEOUT
BRANCH
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 | CY2001 | 02098-00
Your request to enter a “CD” (change of duty) fitness report for 9 March to 10 April 1991, reflecting service in combat with the primary duty of adjutant, could not be considered, as you did not provide such a report. the Reporting Senior's actions in 3c is in no way an invalidating factor in Reference (b) did not contain a very filling out Item 3c and Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00379-02
You requested removal of your fitness reports for 1 March to 28 August 1998 and 1 October to 14 November 1998, as well as documentation of your relief for the good of the service from recruiting duty. ” CMC also “Recruited SNM was put on bed rest/no duty due to pregnancy problems/back problems. (2), the approval authority (GOS) relief from recruiting duty, has supports her request for Additionally, enclosure Based upon this review, 2. following errors require corrective action.
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 | 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 | CY2002 | 08284-01
’s failures C. In correspondence attached as enclosure (3), the HQMC Officer Assignment Branch, Personnel Management Division (MMOA4) has commented to the effect that Petitioner request to remove his FY 2002 failure of selection has merit and warrants favorable action. directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report: Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has the Performance Evaluation Review Board Date of Report -__- _____.__...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03811-01
If that action is not possible, then the petitioner (b) is the Reference \\ . " s the Reviewing Officer on those two reports, as he was Colonel that if Colone he would have so stated in his review. Further, we recommend that his request for a special selection board through BCNR be denied since he has not exhausted the appropriate administrative procedures for requesting a special selection board set forth in references (b) and (c) contact in this matter is Capt Head, Promotion...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08305-00
MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF MAJOR SMC adverse report at the time the report is prepared. 1610 MMER/PERB 6 ; OEC MU MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Ref: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) TION IN THE CASE OF USMC (a) (b) DD Form 149 of 7 Sep 00 Ch l-6 Per 1. with three members present, MC0 161O.llC, the Performance Evaluation Review...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03462-01
icial military record, (l), PERB removed from Lieutenant the fitness report for We defer to BCNR on the issue of Lieutenant Colone 2. request for the removal of his failure of selection to the grade of Colonel. directed that your Naval record will be corrected by removing therefrom the following fitness report: Having reviewed all the facts of record, the Board has the Performance Evaluation Review Board Date of Report Reporting Senior Period of Report 29 Aug 99 co1 980701 t0...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06688-01
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 reviewing officer’s second and third sentences from section K.4 of the fitness report for 20 May 1999 to 30 April 2000, a copy of which is in enclosure (1) at Tab A. As indicated in enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) has...