DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No: 4768-01
8 May 2002
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.
sitting in executive session, considered your
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records,
application on 30 April 2002.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board.
your application,
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
together with all material submitted in support
Your allegations of error and
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record,
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
the Board found that the evidence submitted was
As the result of two prior actions by this Board, substantial
corrective action has been taken in your case.
which was approved on 15 July 1998, resulted in the removal of a
nonjudicial punishment and other documentation from your record,
and the issuance of an honorable discharge by reason of best
interest of the service with an
RR-1 reenlistment code.
The first action,
You reenlisted in the Navy on 23 November 1998 and applied to the
Board for additional corrective action.
The Board considered
your second application on 9 September 1999 and concluded, in
pertinent part, as follows:
The Board believes that Petitioner reenlisted in the
Navy as soon as possible after he was informed of the
Board's action in his case.
Board now concludes that further corrective action is
warranted.
In reaching its decision, the Board notes
that without the second NJP, Petitioner's command would
probably have let the 24 month agreement to remain on
active duty become effective on 4 August 1995.
Therefore,
the Board concludes that the discharge of 5
Given this action, the
July 1995 should be canceled and the record should show
that he continued to serve on active duty until he was
released from active duty on 3 August 1997 with his
service characterized as honorable with an RE-1
reenlistment code.
The Board declines to give him active service until he
reenlisted on 23 November 1998 because there is no
right to reenlistment or to service beyond that which
is obligated in the record.
the Board will back date advancements if an
Concerning the advancement issue the Board notes that
it does not direct promotion because it cannot know if
an individual is qualified for the higher grade.
However,
individual is advanced at a later date.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Board will
occasionally advance individuals up to pay grade E-3 in
an appropriate case.
The Board notes that Petitioner
was an MNSA on 16 May 1994 and concludes that he would
have qualified for advanced to MNSN at some point in
Although the NJP has been
his additional service.
removed from the record,
the Board believes that the
command would still have had a basis to withhold and
delay a recommendation for advancement.
circumstances,
should be advanced to MNSN as of 16 August 1995, which
is the first authorized date after the 24 month
extension became effective.
In addition, the Board
further concludes that with this action, he should have
been reenlisted on 23 November 1998 as an SN.
the Board concludes that Petitioner
Given the
Since your reenlistment you have apparently served in an
excellent manner and been selected for promotion
Specialist Second Class (E-5).
to,Operational
you are again requesting that your
E-4 be backdated because you would have
In your current application,
advancement to pay grade
been promoted to that grade in the rating you were serving in
1995, which had a 100% advancement opportunity.
a correction to show that you reenlisted on 23 November 1998 as
an E-4.
You want your advancement to E-5 backdated as well. In
the alternative,
of 23 November 1998 be backdated to coincide with your discharge
on 3 August 1997 so that you have no break in service and that
your advancements be adjusted accordingly.
you are again requesting that your reenlistment
You also request
The Board concluded that the two previous actions of the Board
provided sufficient relief in your case.
Board noted that you only received the additional period of
constructive service by action of this Board, and it is only
In this regard, the
2
speculation that you would have been advanced to petty officer
during this period.
an E-2 at the time.
advancement and complete other requirements in addition to
passing an advancement examination.
advancement to E-4 at an earlier date was not warranted.
This is especially true since you were only
Further you have to be recommended for
The Board concluded that an
It is well settled in the law that there is no right to
reenlistment and an individual is only entitled to service until
the expiration of enlistment.
addressed and you have not submitted anything new, the Board
concluded that a change in the date of your reenlistment is not
warranted.
Since this issue was previously
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The names and
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken.
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard,
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently,
record,
existence of probable material error or injustice.
the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
You are entitled to have the
it is important to keep in mind that a
when applying for a correction of an official naval
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06172-02
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD Y S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370.510 0 MEH: ddj Docket No: 6172-02 13 November 2002 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 13 November 2002. petitioner's request.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 03681-05
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member in the Marine Corps Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show that he has continuous service in the Regular Marine Corps and that his promotion to staff sergeant (SSGT; E-6) be backdated. On 28 March 2000, the Board concluded that an injustice had occurred and directed that the record be corrected to show that on 8 April 1997, the day after his discharge from the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04356-00
At enclosure (l), an advisory opinion from the Reserve Affairs Division, Career Management Team (CMT), HQMC, states that at no time did Petitioner request an additional extension to remain in the Marine Corps Reserve until the date gap surrounding the missing fitness report was resolved. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by showing he reenlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve for three years on 15 April 2000 vice the two-year reenlistment on 12 April 2001 now of record. That he be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00172-99
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 show the lineal position, date of rank, and effective date in the grade of lieutenant he would have been assigned had he been confirmed in the expected time for an officer selected by the Fiscal Year 99 Lieutenant Line Selection Board. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Ensley, Goldsmith and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06743-06
The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner’s naval record so that all future reviewers will understand the reasons for the change in Petitioner’ s record. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 22 March 2006 he reenlisted in the Marine Corps in the grade of SGT with a date of rank of that date. That this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00363-99
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 show the lineal position, date of rank, and effective date in the grade of lieutenant he would have received in due course on the basis of his commission as an ensign with a 7 October 1994 date of rank. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Ensley, Goldsmith and Pfeiffer, reviewed...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 00658-04
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 petitioner passed through the zone “A” SRB window on 22 January 1998. The petitioner requests to backdate the 18 May 1998 reenlistment contract to 22 January 1998 and receive the zone “A” SRB offered in reference (b) .
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Fri Feb 16 10_49_51 CST 2001
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 show the lineal position, date of rank, and effective date in the grade of lieutenant he would have been assigned had he been promoted in due course. His current date of rank, 24 November 1999, is the date given to him as though he was selected by the FY-99 Active-Duty Lieutenant Line...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05490-01
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 BUPERS memorandum which is attached. Per reference (b), school or "C" C .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06239-01
Enclosures DEPARTMENT OF THE N AVY P E R S ONNEL COMMAN 5720 INTEGRITY DRIV MILLINGTON TN 38055000 NAV Y E D 0 1610 PERS-3 11 17 December 2001 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Via: PERS/BCNR Coordinator (PERS-OOZCB) Subj: E Ref: (a) BUPERSINST 16 10.10 EVAL Manual Encl: (1) BCNR File 1. The member requests his promotion recommendation be changed on his performance evaluation for the period 1 March 1998 to 1 September 1999. The report in...