Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05661-01
Original file (05661-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
X

2 NAVY ANNE

S

WASHINGTON DC

 

20370-5100

LCC:ddj
Docket No: 5661-01
4 September 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,
Your allegations of error and injustice were
considered your application on 4 Septkmber 2002.
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
In addition, the Board considered the advisory
applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
opinion furnished by CMC memorandum 1741 MMSR 6 of 1 August 2002, 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
the advisory opinion. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of
the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

  i n

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. 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.

In this regard, it is important

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

HEADQUARTERSUN

lTLDSTATESMAR

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
lNECORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROA
QUANTICO,  VIRGINIA 22

Y

D

 

134-S  

103

IN 

REPLY 

REFER 

TO:

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

NAVAL RECORDS

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

Subj:

BCNR APPLICATION IN THE

CASE OF

STAFF

1741
MMSR-6
1 Aug 02

(a) MMER Route Sheet of 

25Ju102,

Docket No. 5661-02

The reference requests an advisory

opinion on Staff Sergeant

equest to correct his records to show that he is

Ref:

1.

retired in the rank of Gunnery Sergeant.

Staff Sergeant

2.
ability Retired List in the rank of Technical Sergeant and pay
grade E-6 on 1 July 1953.
He was later placed on the Retired
List by reason of permanent physical disability on 1 November
1956 in the same rank and pay grade.

was transferred to the Temporary Dis-

Staff Sergeant

3 .
1 July 1953, during the period when a now obsolete rank titling
system was in effect.
The highest enlisted rank and corres-
ponding pay grade he held was that of Technical Sergeant, E-6.

served from 14 January 1942 thru

retirement,

After Staff Sergeant

4.
titles, Sergeant Major and First Sergeant, were established in
pay grade E-7 in December 1954.
Sergeant was then terminated by the Marine Corps.
January 1959,
our present structure was introduced with Staff
Sergeant in pay grade E-6,
Gunnery Sergeant in pay grade E-7,
First Sergeant and Master Sergeant in pay grade E-8 and Master
Gunnery Sergeant and Sergeant Major in pay grade E-9.

two additional

The use of the rank of Technical

Later, on 1

5.
Unfortunately, no basis exists to change the rank title of
Marines who retired as Technical Sergeants (E-6) to reflect the
title Gunnery Sergeant (E-7) in the present system when, in fact,
the highest pay grade satisfactorily served was E-6.
Staff Sergeant
remains that of Staff Sergeant, E-6.

s correct retired rank and pay grade

Therefore,

6 .

Point of contact is Mr

MMSR-6,

784-9310.



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06756-98

    Original file (06756-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Retirement Policy which states that Marines in the grade of Gunnery Sergeant or above, must serve two years in their current pay grade prior to transfer to retirement status. 6756-98 Reference (a) requests an advisory opinion on Gunnery 1. Reference (a) requests an advisory opinion on Gunnery Sergeant petition with regard to his retirement rank.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Wed Oct 11 14_07_47 CDT 2000

    Petitioner’s three—member Administrative Discharge Board sat from 7 to 8 December, found unanimously that the allegation of drug use was substantiated, and recommended separation with a general (under On 15 October, the Attorney Subj: BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS (BCNR),_APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF (FORMER) GUNNERY SERGEANT~!J~t~~J ~ S. MARINE CORPS honorable) characterization of service. Petitioner was 7~q~97 b. Board for Correction reviE-iof ~ the administrative recommended in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 04848-98

    Original file (04848-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by Headquarters, Marine Corps, copies of which are attached. d. It is also important to note that Petitioner's battalion commander, not his company commander or company gunnery sergeant, referred his charge to a special court-martial and approved the sentence. We conclude that Petitioner's special court-martial did not result in an error or injustice and should not be removed from his record.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06254-01

    Original file (06254-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAV BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD NAVY ANNEX 2 WASHINGTON DC 20370.510 0 Y S LCC:ddj Docket No: 6254-01 20 February 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CMC memorandum is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06263-08

    Original file (06263-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 an advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, a copy of which is enclosed. 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 | 08700-01

    Original file (08700-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD X 2 NAVY ANNE Y S WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG Docket No: 17 July 200 8700-01 2 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. 87130-01 The reference requests an advisory opinion on Sergeant request to correct his records to show a Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code other than the code assigned when he was transferred...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09016-07

    Original file (09016-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 HQMC Memo 1741 MMSR-6 dtd 21 Nov 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 | CY2010 | 11342-10

    Original file (11342-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 2011. 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, and notwithstanding the favorable advisory opinion dated 27 January 2011, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 06583-98

    Original file (06583-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 1999. 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. Given his request he is not entitled to any further pay from the U.S. Government.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04905-06

    Original file (04905-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps dated10 August 2006, with enclosure, and 20 September 2006, copies ofwhich are 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. The reference requests an advisory opinionto correct his record to show that he was promoted to the rank of major prior to...