DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2NAVYANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SRB
Docket No. 92797-04
16 March 2005
Dear
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 15 March
2005. 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 CMC memorandum RFF-F10 7200 dated
21 December 2004, 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 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. 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,
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3000 MARINE CORPS PENTAGON
WASHINGTON, DC 20350-3000 IN
REPLY REFER TO
RFF-F10
7200
EThIC 2 1 2004 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR , BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj: BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
1. We have been requested to provide an advisory opinion on
application requesting payment of accrued leave prior to his General
Courts Martial.
2. Review of pay account and courts martial
order shows that he was detained in pre-trial confinement, eliminating
the ember’s ability to take leave prior to being sentenced to ion term
confinement. This pre-triai confinement
being a potential threat to the community or a fight risk. Current
regulations do not allow him to sell accr ed leave in this particular
circumstance, therefore, we ca not recommend favorable consideration of
his request.
3. Point of con act for this advisory opinion is Master
Sergeant a
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 10334-05
They agreed with the reasoning of the Claims Appeal Board that “in the absence of proof that (you) spent the erroneous per-diem payments for their intended purpose, waiver of the remaining $17,351.26 is not appropriate.” Thus they found no error or injustice in the action to recoup the $17,351.26 in erroneous per-diem payments.Accordingly, your application has been denied. The activation orders authorized per diem; however, the Marine Corps cannot be liable for the erroneous actions of its...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08989-05
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by HQMC memorandum 1070 JAM7 of 20 December 2005, and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), letter of 5 April 2006, copies of which 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. You requested an advisory opinion on Private(hereinafter “Applicant”)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06624-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 April 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. Applicant fails to provide substantial evidence of probable material error or injustice in support of his application.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4734 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2014. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8674 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 2014. in addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by HOMC memo 7200 RFF-11 dated 7 August 2014, 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6707 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 January 2015. 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08275-05
The witness was an officer but was not Applicant’s platoon commander, reporting senior, reviewing officer, nor company commander at the time of the NJP.3. Per reference (a), an application for correction of a record must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice, unless the Board excuses the untimely filing in the interest of justice. Timely applications are crucial to a proper determination of an allegation of error where, as here, the ability to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0529 14
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100" ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 DIC Docket No. In addition, the Board on furnished by HoMc memo 7200 RFF-11 dated 9 May 2014, 4 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07649-07
There is no error in the record. Applicant chose to assault another Marine and his command determined it was appropriate to punish him in accordance with Marine Corps regulations.5. No corrective action is warranted in this case because Applicant fails to demonstrate by substantial evidence that his NJP was in error or an injustice.6.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6114 14
Documentary materia 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. NR6114-14 a correction of an official naval he applicant to demonstrate the existence of Consequently, when applying for record, the burden is on t probable material error or injustice.