DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
MEH: ddj
Docket No:
20 March 2001
757040
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 20 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.
opinion furnished by CMC memorandum 1040 MPP-25 of 21 February 2001, 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. At the time of your 19 August 2000 reenlistment there was no zone “A” multiple for
Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 03 11. Although you were erroneously told you would
receive a bonus, the Board cannot authorize payment of an entitlement that did not exist. In this
connection, the Board disagrees 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.
,
Docket No.
757040
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
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
VlRGtNlA 22
QUANTICO,
134-s
t4EADQUARTERS UNITED STATES
MARINE CORP
S
103
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1040
MPP-25
21 Feb 01
MEMORANDUM FOR
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
NAVAL RECORDS
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
IN THE CASE 0
Upon review of the subject route sheet we submit the
1.
following comments:
a.
There was not a multiple in effect at the time of CPL
Arnold's reenlistment.
b.
The Marine Corps depends on the word of Marines charged
Without
with the execution of the first term alignment plan.
this trust, our retention efforts would soon erode dramatically.
be paid an SRB multiple of one that
included in his reenlistment
Recommend this payment be made using the payment
Recommend Corporal
2.
was promised by MMEA 6
contract.
method of 50% up front with the remaining 50% being paid in three
equal installments on the anniversary of his reenlistment.
is the payment method that was in effect at the time of Corporal
,w reenlistment.
base pay at time of
MPP calculates Corporal
3.
$1,447.20 and that he was
reenlistment (CPL over 3 YOS
eligible for 47 months of SRB at time of reenlistment (4 years
$5,668.20.
minus one month left until his
However, recommend SRB calculation be computed by Marine's career
planner and approved by DFAS Kansas City to ensure accuracy of
above payment calculation.
This equates to
EAS)..
This
4.
POC in this case is Maj
(703) 784-9361.
Head, Manpower P
Budget Branch
Programs and
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05561-05
5561-05 23 August 2005This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 August 2005. 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. for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02936-07
2936-07 2 July 2007This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 Usc 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2007. 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10046-06
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 furnished by CMC Memo 1040 M~4EA dtd 8 Jan 07, 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 | CY2002 | 10717-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 15 January 2002 you were honorably discharged by reason of expiration of enlistment and assigned an RE-30 reenlistment code, as directed by CMC. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 04281-00
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. The following comments are provided: As shown in enclosure (1), Corpora1~ was off contract from the Marine Corps...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08205-00
On 13 October 1999, Petitioner, then a Petitioner's appeal was denied. received NJP for intending to deceive 60 days Analysis. Petitioner, however, was just following the orders of his staff sergeant when he typed the false official document.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01145-06
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 May 2006. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00204-02
The Board cannot authorize payment of money a member is not entitled to. As noted in the (SRB) you would receive but there is nothing the Board advisory opinion you could request your term of reenlistment be changed to eligible for the full amount of SRB, however, term. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the ii1.j burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or ttstice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03872-02
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 11 July 2002, a copy of which is attached. application with supporting 118(11) MC0 (IRAM), authorizes commanders to make P1070.12K, Marine Corps Individual Records 2. s claim that the page 11 unjust because the contents of counseling, did occur The event, d. Lance Corpora page 11 entry in her provide any other supporting documented evidence to support her request for removal of the page 11 entry.
This final decision, dated May 29, 2008, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, a first class gunner’s mate (GM1/E-6), asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for six years on both his sixth and tenth active duty anniversa- ries to receive Zone A and Zone B selective reenlistment bonuses (SRBs).1 The applicant alleged that on November 16, 2006, he learned from his unit’s yeoman that he had been eligible to receive...