DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
MEH: mh
Docket No:
16 July 2002
3805-02
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 16 July 2002. 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
attached.
In addition, the Board considered the advisory
loo0 MMEA-6 of 4 June 2002, a copy of which is
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.
to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
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.
In this regard, it is important
Consequently,
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosure
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
DEPARTMENT OF THE
3280 RUSSELL ROA
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103
NAVY
D
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1000
MMEA 6
4 June 02
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR,
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
BCNR DOCKET NO.
YEAR CONTRACT CASE OF
03805
We carefully reviewed the package
1.
comment is provided:
for
a.
I_0 February 2000
reenlistment.
nd the following
submitted for 48 months
11 February 2000
22 February 2000
March 2000
22 March 2000
2 August 2000
48 month reenlistment authority (reference number,
KUWA-4GDJQS) was approved by this headquarters
(MMEA-6).
ate the command, specifically
ding Officer), reenlisted
nder authority number (KUWA-4GDJQS).
reenlistment shall not be
in the opinion of the commander,
The command declined
SNM received NJP for DUI.
the 48 month reenlistment authority, per
MC0
P1040.31H, paragraph 4101.3 which states "Even if
reenl;stment authority has been granted
by CMC (MMEA-6),
executed when,
the Marine authorized to reenlist has failed to
maintain the high standards of professional and
personal performance which led to the authority
for reenlistment being granted.
the command must immediately inform the CMC
(MMEA-6),
request."
A subsequent request for a three-month extension
was submitted for ti
legal action against
who will then reconsider the Marine's
In such cases,
ending
The request for a three-month extension was
approved,
acknowledged on
(reference number KUWA-4MTQNM) and
5/23/2000.
The final request in this case was for a
eight-month reenlistment.
approve the forty-eight month request.
this headquarters approved a 24 month reenlistment
"For further observation“, (reference number
KUWA-4MTQNM).
November 2000.
SNM executed this reenlistment on 2
CMC (MMEA-6) did not
forty-
Instead,
2.
Regarding
be re-instate
Observation contract remain his official contract.
the 24 month authority,
the authority for a 48 month reenlistment based on
it became the valid contract.
request for the original 48 month authority to
ters recommends the 24 month For Further
As soon as SNM accepted
SNM's command declined
pending
legal issue,
time.
and his End of Active Service (EAS) date reflects the 24 month reenlistment.
and SNM opted not to pursue the 48 month reenlistment at the
SNM executed the 24 month For Further Observation authority,
Instead,
has served 19 months of his 24 month contract, and will be
ubmit
for further service on 2 August 2002. This headquarters
submit for a 48 month reenlistment at that time.
2.
Point of contact is Major
at DSN 278-9235.
y
t
li
s
oepu
anah
r
En
___
ead~
H
Assignment Branch
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00004-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 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. The actual reenlistment request for 36 months supports these documents as well.
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 | 04136-01
hereinafter, referred to as Petitioner, this Board requesting, in effect, record be corrected to show he was entitled to full separation pay when he was discharged from the Marine Corps on 21 November 2000. that the applicable naval filed enclosure (1) with The Board, consisting of Messrs. Geisler, Harrison, and 2. Petitioner asserts that his request to reenlist was not processed properly by his command or Headquarters CMC, MMEA-6. Because the request was overtaken by events MMEA-6 The...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07312-99
opinion furnished by CMC memorandum attached. 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. ?#%S MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: BCNR DOCKET OF STAFF **1;, We have reviewed Staff Sergeant 1. his request for a contract modification and subsequent entitlement to a Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) be denied.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02581-00
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. opinion furnished by CMC memorandum attached. 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 | 03167-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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. time from 22 December 2000 until 19 January 2001. for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01387-01
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370.510 0 MEH:ddj Docket No: 1387-01 17 April 2001 From: To: Subj : Ref: Encl: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD (a) (1) (2) (3) Title 10 U.S.C. 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 to...
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 | CY1999 | 03510-99
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CMC Memorandum 100111 MMEA-6, a copy of which is attached. 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. Unfortunately, Stalff sergean- executed his reenlistment authority on 24 March 1999, as a Sergeant in PMOS 2531.
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...