Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03722-06
Original file (03722-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


SRB
Docket No. 3722-06
1 Nov 06

This 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 31 October 2006. 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 HQMC memorandum 1070 MIO of 23 August 2006, 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


         W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director




Enclosure










DEPARTMENT OF
THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103


1070
MIO
AUG 23 2O02



MEMORANDUM FOP. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOP. CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:


End; (1) Copy of NAVMC 118(3), Chronological Record (3 pages)

1.       Former XXXXX application with supporting docuinentation concerning her request for correction to her leave status to show that no leave was taken during the period April 1999 through May 1999 has been reviewed. DFAS-Denver Center has claimed Former Private XXXX had used 20 day of leave, which resu1ted in 14.5 days of excess leave plus a penalty of 1.5 days of Leave However, DFAS was unsure if it was in 1997 or 1999.

2.       Marines use leave and it is reported in two ways. Marines request leave to take time off from daily routine that is reported by the Marine’s administrative center, and leave taken when a Marina is reassigned to new permanent duty station. Former Private XXXX was reassigned on 990330 and she transferred to 2d FSSG for duty. Former Private XXXX was a Sergeant and she was authorized 4 days of proceed when transferred, took 3 days for travel time, and used 20 days of leave before she reported to her new duty assignment on 990428 per the enclosure. She submitted her travel voucher to the local finance office to liquidate her entitlements and the 20 days leave was recorded to her service records at that time.

3.       It appears that former P rivate did use 20 days of leave which resulted in l4.5 days of advance leave. However, instead of earning leave to remove the advance leave balance, former Private was absent without leave as of 990706 and did not return to her parent unit until 991102. Subsequently, she was absent without leave again from 991108 to 011120. In view of the above, it is recommended that the board for Correction of Naval Records disapprove Former Private request for correction to her leave status to show that no leave was taken during the period April 1999 through May 1999. The enclosure is forwarded for information. Point of contact is

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05043-06

    Original file (05043-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) , Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by removing the service record page lie (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) entry dated 10 May 2005 (copy in enclosure (1) at Tab A).2. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing the service record page lie (“Administrative Remarks (1070)”) entry dated 10 May 2005. In view of the above, it is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 10364-05

    Original file (10364-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the Board for correction of Naval Records (BCNR) has not removed the administrative reduction from XXXX record. You requested we provide an advisory opinion on Corporal Ramirez’s (hereinafter “Applicant”) application to reinstate his previous rank of Sergeant (Applicant was administratively reduced to Corporal) -2. Applicant claims he was reduced to Private First Class (PFC), but there is no documented evidence in Applicant’s record stating this reduction took place.4.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04878-06

    Original file (04878-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CMC’s decision to include Applicant’s adverse material in her OMPF reflects the fact that the misconduct was substantiated in Applicant’s case. Paragraph 4002 of MCO P5800.16, Marine Corps Manual for Legal Administration (LEGADMINMAN) provides information and guidance concerning reports of officer misconduct; paragraph 4004 of the LEGADMINMAN provides information and guidance concerning formal report of officer nonjudicial punishment (NJP) or disposition of allegations of- misconduct. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10463-06

    Original file (10463-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    They recommended removing the entry dated 14 November 2003 because it was not signed by Petitioner’s commander, as required because it indicated she could be the subject of administrative separation if she failed to take Corrective action.CONCLUSION:Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of the contents of enclosure (2), the Board finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting the following corrective action: acknowledged the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01736-06

    Original file (01736-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 12 June 2007, and the advisory opinion from the HQMC Manpower Information Operations, Manpower Management Information Systems Division (MIO), dated 30 January 2007, copies of which are attached. The responsibility to implement this policy rests with the commander ~ not meet the prescribed weight standards, the commander~- must take specific actions prior to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13191-10

    Original file (13191-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 20 May 2010 and his rebuttal dated 24 May 2010, copies of which are at Tab A. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Dixit, McBride and Vogt, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06664-11

    Original file (06664-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Ms. Aldrich and Messrs. Pfeiffer and Spain, reviewed Pétitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 8 September 2011, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the limited corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)") entry dated 26 October 2010. That any material or entries inconsistent with...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00605-06

    Original file (00605-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    By correspondence dated 14 November 2003 (copy at Tab B), Petitioner was advised that his selection by the CY 2003 Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board had been revoked for unspecified “unprofessional conduct and poor judgment” exhibiting failure to maintain the high standards expected of a Marine Corps staff noncommissioned officer.e. Enclosure (7) documents that a member of the Board’s staff contacted the HQMC Enlisted Promotion Section and was informed that had Petitioner’s selection by the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08989-05

    Original file (08989-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 00245-02

    Original file (00245-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    - -- 1552 (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) (3) Subject ’s naval record Email, 28 Aug 0 I, DFAS-KCIFT Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, in effect, that the applicable naval record be 1. filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, corrected to show he was sent in a temporary duty under instruction status to attend the Infantry Officers Advanced Course vice being sent on a Permanent Change of Station (PCS). Petitioner must present...