Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10714-06
Original file (10714-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


 LCC
 Docket No. 10714-06
7 Feb 07






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 6 February 2007. 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 1400/3 NMPR-2, 19 December 2006, a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of 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 also 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
MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
         HARRY LEE HALL, 17 LEJEUNE ROAD
         QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5104



                  IN EPLY REFER TO:
          1400/3
          MMPR-2
 DEC 1 9 2006
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS

 Subj:    ADVI 0 Y OPNION IN THE CASE OF

Ref:     (a) BCNR Docket Number 10714-06 dtd 6 Dec 06
 (b)      CMC memorandum 1400/3 MMPR-2 dtd 21 Sep 06
(c)      MCO Pl400.32D ENLPROMMAN
1.       Per reference (a) , requests docket number 7501-06 be reopened. In his previous request (docket number ~ requested a backdate/remedial promotion to first sergeant for the FY 2004 Sergeant Major through Master Sergeant Selection Board due to the selection board not briefing him as a recruiter.
2.       Per reference (b), it was determined that was properly considered for promotion to first sergeant by the FY 2004 Sergeant Major through Master Sergeant Selection Board. Per reference (c), paragraph 3602.4i, missing/incorrect information in the Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) (e.g., awards, certificates, course completions [except required PME]) is not grounds for remedial consideration. Research showed that, as of 14 September 2006, no Recruiter School Certificate has ever been submitted for inclusion into First s OMPF. Furthermore, it was responsibility to ensure his records were accurate and e prior to the convening date of the FY 2004 Sergeant Major through Master Sergeant Selection Board. Per paragraph 3103 of reference (b), a Marine is entitled to correspond directly with the selection board considering him/her for promotion. This correspondence can include letters to the President of the selection board, copies of award certificates, school completion certificates, letters of recommendations, etc. Therefore, although there was not a reporting occasion between the time became a recruiter (June 2003) and the time the FY 2004 Sergeant Major through Master Sergeant Selection Board convened (20 October 2003), could have provided the selection board with information showing he was on recruiting duty.







Subj:    ADVISORY OPINION IN THE CASE OF

3 .      Based on the foregoing, request does not meet the criteria contained in paragraph 3602 of reference (b) as it pertains to Enlisted Remedial Selection Board eligibility. We must, therefore, recommend that request for backdate/remedial consideration not be granted favorable consideration.



Major, U. S. Marine Corps
Head, Enlisted Promotion Section

































2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00042-07

    Original file (00042-07.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. Per reference (a) XXXXX , requests backdate/remedial consideration for promotion to gunnery sergeant by the FY 2004 Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board due to having an inaccurate fitness report removed from his record.2. Paragraph 3602.51 of reference (b) states, when a Marine fails to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01685-06

    Original file (01685-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the alternative, you now request new enlisted remedial selection boards (ERSB’s) for the Calendar Year (CY) 1999, 2000 and 2001 master sergeant and first sergeant selection boards.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2007. The Board found the ~Th’IPR-2 advisory opinion dated 2 August 2006 was correct as to the number of Marines with whom you were compared, despite the indications, in the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03326-06

    Original file (03326-06.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 memorandum 1400/3 MMPR-2, 12 October 2006, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01607-07

    Original file (01607-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On April 15, 2005, Petitioner, through counsel, submitted an application to the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) seeking removal of the January 1, 2001 to July 7,2Docket No. 01607-072001 fitness report, removal of naval records pertaining to the NJP and a remedial promotion board See enclosure (4)g. Petitioner’s request was bifurcated. Here, Petitioner did not take any action to have his fitness report removed until 15 April 2005, well after the dates of the Selection Boards...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03401-02

    Original file (03401-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 LCC: ddj Docket No: 3401-02 10 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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03192-06

    Original file (03192-06.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 from Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 7 June 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09101-06

    Original file (09101-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    9101-06 11 Jan 07This 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 9 January 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. A review of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7775 13

    Original file (NR7775 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    He was then selected by the FY 2012 Gunnery Sergeant Selection Board, convened on 17 April 2012, and he was promoted to gunnery sergeant with a date of rank and effective date of 1 December 2012. d. Enclosure (4) shows that the in zone percentage selected for the FY 2006 Staff Sergeant Selection Board was 62.2. e. Enclosure (5) reflects that the HQMC Performance Evaluation Review Board directed removing Petitioner's fitness report for 1 April to 2 November 2006, which documented the later...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06105-02

    Original file (06105-02.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. opinion furnished by CMC memorandum 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 | CY2008 | 07636-08

    Original file (07636-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 2008. The Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the HQMC memo 1400/3 MMPR-2 of 8 Sept 08, 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.