Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05561-05
Original file (05561-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
                                             WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
                                                      MEH
                                                                                           Docket No. 5561-05
                                                                                          23 August 2005








This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 U SC 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 August 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 1040 MMEA of 12 Aug 05, a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted did establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. However, in this connection, the Board does not concur with the comments contained in paragraph 4 of the advisory opinion. The Board cannot authorize a payment without a corresponding correction to the record and there is no correction that can be made which will entitle you to a zone “A” Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB). As noted in paragraph 3, at the time of your approval for a Lateral Move to MOS 2834 you had already passed out of the zone “A” eligibility. SRB zone criteria are established by statute and are not waiverable. Accordingly, your application has been denied. Should you decide to pursue a discharge based on breach of contract that must be pursued through administrative channels, not the Board. 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. 5561-05



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
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
                                             QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103

                                    IN REPLY REFER TO:
                                                                                                    1040
                                                                                                    MME R 12 Aug 05
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:    BCNR DOCKET NO. 5561-05; REQUEST FOR SELECTIVE REENLISTMENT BONUS (SRB) PAYMENT ON BEHALF OF SERGEANT
Ref:     (a) MARADMIN 391/02
1.       We have carefully reviewed package and the following comments are provided:
2. On 21 July 2004,      submitted a 48-month reenlistment request in conjunction with his request for lateral move to MOS 2834. The request was approved on 4 October 2004.
3.       Per the reference, Fiscal Year 2005 SRB’s apply to first term Marines with 17 months to 6 years of active Marine Corps service. Due to administrative oversight, this headquarters erroneously approved. for a SRB Zone A multiple of two in MOS 2834 after he co mpleted 6 years, 6 months and 10 days of active Marine Corps service.
4.       This headquarters recommends payment of the SRB Zone A multiple of two and that the existing reenlistment contract remain intact for

         5.       Point of contact is      MMEA-6, at DSN 278-9237.





Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps
Head, Enlisted Assignments Branch

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06673-09

    Original file (06673-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 September 2009. 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 example, an FYO9 or FY10 0369 career Marine at zone ¢c who executes a reenlistment 31 days from the release of this MARADMIN will no longer...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07570-00

    Original file (07570-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 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. is the payment method that was in effect at the time of Corporal ,w reenlistment.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02936-07

    Original file (02936-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2009 | 03773-09

    Original file (03773-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ‘ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 June 2009. Sincerely, TR QOD tomeae Foe W. DEAN PFEIFFER es | Executive Director ( Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 3280 RUSSELL ROAD © QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1040 MMEA 26 May 09 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: BCNR DOCKET NO 03773-09; REQUEST...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10046-06

    Original file (10046-06.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 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 | CY2005 | 06163-05

    Original file (06163-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    6163-05 20 September 2005From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICORef: (a) 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 establish entitlement to a zone ‘A” Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) for Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 0311.2. The Board,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07312-99

    Original file (07312-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 03274-10

    Original file (03274-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 DIC Docket No. 3274-10 27 Jul 10 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO Ref: {a} 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 establish entitlement to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00004-01

    Original file (00004-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 12443-10

    Original file (12443-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5106 b -2, ao ty pit 5 fom a LT DIC Docket No. 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 modify a Selective Reenlistment Bonus. The Board, consisting of Mr. Pfeiffer, Mr. Zsalman, and Mr. George, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and...