Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05797-01
Original file (05797-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

SMC
Docket No: 05797-o 
29 November 2001

I

Dear Staff 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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 29 November 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 Marine Corps Recruiting Command, dated
31 August 2001, a copy of which is attached, and your letter dated 17 October 2001 with
enclosures.

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.

The Board was unable to find anything misleading, inaccurate or gratuitous about the
statements in paragraph 2 of the contested request dated 23 September 1998 for your relief
from recruiting duty for the good of the service. They noted that your rebuttal of
25 September 1998 to the contested request did not bring up the matter of your wife ’s
diabetic condition. The Board was unable to accept your unsupported statement, at
paragraph 3 of your letter dated 17 October 2001, that after you were first diagnosed with
acute stress reaction, all parties involved agreed this diagnosis was not a hindrance to your
performance of your duties, “so long as [you were] placed in a Recruiting Sub [sic] Station
that could better assist [you] in ensuring that [your] both [sic] wife ’s needs were not met, as
well as ensuring that [you] had every available resource at [your] disposal to accomplish
[your] mission. 

” In this regard, they noted that your rebuttal of 25 September 1998 stated  “it

has also been determined by the physicians that these symptoms will subside with this relief
” They noted that the request for your relief did not indicate any problem
[emphasis added]. 
with your production, which your letter of 17 October 2001, paragraph 4, says you achieved
” The Board found no inconsistency between the request
 
“without many of the tools required.
for your relief, on the one hand, and your change of duty fitness report for 13 March to
24 September 1998 and Outstanding Recruiter Award for June 1998 on the other. Finally,
the Board found your relief from recruiting duty, of which you were notified, dictated
voiding of your additional military occupational specialty of 8411 (recruiter), so failure to
notify you specifically of this administrative action would be inconsequential.

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

UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
MARINE CORPS RECRUITING COMMAND

3280 RUSSELL ROAD

QUANTICO,

VA 22134-5103

IN REPLY REFER TO.
161 0
G- l
31 Aug 01

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL

RECORDS

Subj:

BOARD FOR
CASE OF S

C

Encl:

(1) Copy of Staff  

Sergean  

q

statement of 25 Sep 98

1.

We were asked to provide an advisory opinion on Staff Sergeant

We recommend that Staff 

uest to have all references to his relief for good of
removed from his
Sergea

Personnel File  (OMPF) .
est be denied.

Sergea
ret

On 4 December 1998, Staff 

2.
as a canvassing recruiter by the 
On 28 October 1998, Staff 
Sergean
(MOS) of 8
Occupational Specialty  
Eastern Recruiting Region.
Sergean
Staff 
reaction, whi
conflicts associated with the rigors of recruiting duty.

The GOS relief in this case is a result of
ffering from a diagnosed case of acute stress
is ability to handle situational personal

additional Military
d by the Commanding General,

as relieved of his duties
on commanding officer.

Staff Sergeant

erts that language included in
that he should have been given

In fact
rebuttal statement.
statement to his GOS
reco
which includes statements
statement was filed as enclosure (7) of the original GOS package in his
case.

Sergean

Staff 

mendation is
y to provide a
ovided a rebuttal
at enclosure  
(l),
s is adverse.
His

GOS was processed in accordance with Volume
Station Operations.
or removal of references to his relief for

We recommend that Staff

duty be denied.

Chief of Staff



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02641-00

    Original file (02641-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The following comments concerning the page 11 entry dated 960112 4. are provided: a. The following comments concerning the page 11 entry dated 980326 5. are provided:' a. he was he statement would be filed acknowledged the counseling " to" make a statement in Again, it is noted that a copy of the rebuttal statement Sergean furthe b. Sergean does not provide documented evidence to support his claim that the page 11 entry is in error or unjust.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08387-01

    Original file (08387-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Petitioner denied that the applicant Petitioner was offered, and he accepted, NJP. Analysis a. Petitioner claims that his NJP was unjust because he believes the preliminary inquiry into his misconduct contained "inconsistencies" a statement Petitioner made at the NJP. The record of the NJP reveals that the NJP was just.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04133-01

    Original file (04133-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Copies of RFC documents appearing in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) are at Tab B. removal of the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)“) counseling entry dated 17 April 1996, a copy of which is at Tab C, as he says it resulted from the fitness report. He provides his rebuttal of 17 April 1996 to the page 11 entry, and he states that he does not know why it is not in his record. The Board for Correction of Naval Records disapprove request for removal of the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06881-99

    Original file (06881-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    They were unable to find how, if at all, his report influenced your nonjudicial punishment or your removal from the 1998 staff sergeant selection list, nor could they find how he changed his opinions following the review of his report by the CO. We reviewed Sergeant documents concerning his Administrative Remarks page 11 entries dated 980804 and 981125, Offenses and Punishment page 12 entry dated 990311 and CMC letter 1450/3 MMPR-2 dated 2. In view of the above, it is recommended...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07499-01

    Original file (07499-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 2002. Staff Sergeant application with supporting documents has been ncerning his request for removal of the sensitive medical documentation contained in his official military personnel files (OMPF). Staff medical documentation contained in his OMPF.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03119-01

    Original file (03119-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1 2001 MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: SE OF STAFF SERGEAN Staff Sergeant 1. has been reviewed concerning his request for removal of the Administrative Remarks (1070) NAVMC 000714 and CMC letter of selection from the 2000 Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board, from his service records. 118(11) page 11 entry dated 1450/5 MMPR-2 dated 22 Aug 2000, revocation application with supporting documents MC0 authorizes commanders to make entries on page...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08381-00

    Original file (08381-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The petitioner has offered absolutely no documentary that he missed only six hours of class Finally, while paragraph nine of enclosure (5) to evidence whatsoever to prove his allegations that his absences were due to medical reasons or that the report itself contains "false statements" (i.e., vice 60). The counseling entry meets the elements of a proper page 11 counseling in that it lists specific deficiencies and recommendations for corrective found, and states that Sergeant to make a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08312-01

    Original file (08312-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    : MEMORANDUM'FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: E CASE OF GUNNERY SERG USMCR Sergea Gunnery 1. has been reviewed concerning his request for removal of the Administrative Remarks (1070) NAVMC 990722 from his service records. Paragraph 1006.1 of Command The following comments/opinions concerning the page 11 entry 6. dated 990722 are provided: a. rection of Naval Records disapprove equest for removal of the Administrative 11) page 11 entry dated 990722 from...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06283-02

    Original file (06283-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing from the service record page “I 11 ( “Administrative Remarks (1070)“) entry dated 21 July 1993 the following sentence: understand that action will be taken to ’void my additional MOS of 9962 and to revoke the authority to wear the Navy/Marine Corps Parachutist Insignia. states in his rebuttal statement, "refused to jump during a d. Paragraph 4012 of the IRAM provides guidance in the preparation of a page 11 entry if a Marine has been...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08259-01

    Original file (08259-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 2 November 2001 with enclosure, the advisory opinion from the HQMC Manpower Management Information Systems Division (MIFD), dated 11 December 2001 with enclosure, and the memorandum for the record dated 23 January 2002, copies of which are attached. The following comments/opinions concerning the page 11 entry 6 . on the Marine's grade, experience, position,...