DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
DIC
Docket No. 2509-08
29 July 2008
Dear®
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
28 July 2008. 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 HOMC Memo 1040 MMFA dtd
24 Jun 08, 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.
incerely,
Wj SS f |
W. DEAN
Dye r
Executive
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1040
MMEA
24 Jun 08
MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL
RECORDS
Subj: BCNR DOCKET NUMBER 02509-08; REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION
IN THE CASE TT
1. We have carefully reconsidered QM ibe - 2; -
and the following additional comments are provided.
2. This headquarters understands that a mathematical error
occurred regard i ntl, total active service
in his reenlistment request of 29 June 2007. The error caused
him to submit a 24 month reenlistment request vice 36 months.
3. Had POE been approved for a 36 month
reenlistment, he would not have been qualified for any monetary
bonus in conjunction with his reenlistment.
4. The correct procedure for Qi OEMs. => follow is
to submit a request for a one year extension to this headquarters
via his chain of command. When approved, this extension will
allow him to gain the additional obligated service necessary to
submit his request to transfer to the Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.
5. This headquarters appreciates the opportunity to reconsider
ree 2:2. However, our advisory opinion of
10 April 2008 remains unchanged.
GS-15, Deputy Head,
Enlisted Assignment Branch
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00716-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2008. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, 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 | CY2009 | 03773-09
‘ 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 | CY2008 | 05907-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 September 2008. 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. We have carefully reviewed case and provide the following comments.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06911-07
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. Once a code is correctly assigned it is not routinely changed or upgraded as a result of events that occur after separation or based on merely on the passage of time.4 Enclosure (6) is returned for final actionHead, Performance Evaluation Review Branch Personnel Management Division By the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 04281-00
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 material error or injustice. The following comments are provided: As shown in enclosure (1), Corpora1~ was off contract from the Marine Corps...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01921-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 2008. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, and notwithstanding the advisory opinion, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04451-08
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. At the time of separation, mig: - was assigned a reenlistment code of RE-30, which indicates he would not extend/reenlist to comply with Permanent Change of Station (PCS) Orders. The reenlistment code assigned by the Marine Corps is an administrative marking which reflects ‘the member’s...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03387-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 2008. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02791-07
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Commandant of the Marine Corps dated 11 June 2007, 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. 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 | CY2007 | 07621-07
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 Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Branch, 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...