DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX TRG
WASHINGTON OG 20370-5100 Docket No: 9975-08
9 June 2009
“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 2 June 2009. 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 an advisory
opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, a copy of which
is enclosed and your rebuttal thereto dated 26 January 2009.
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,
\Qus
W. DEAN PFE
Executive D1
or
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VA 22134-5103 INJREPOVCREFER TO:
MMSR-5
30 Dec 08
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:
piesa rss a Leaps
Ref: (a) Chairman BCNR ltr TRG:jdh Docket No; 09975-08 of
7 Nov 08 ,
(b) Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 12731a
fc} Selected Reserve Transition Benefits Program (MCO
P1900R.17)
Encl: (1) Copy o a Pretirement request w/end dtd
Ee ee
19930713
1. Reference (a) requests an advisory opinion Cn, AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02991
Letter from HQ AFMC to applicant notifying her of two reassignment opportunities and her eligibility for RTAP. Letter from HQ AFMC to applicant notifying her of ARPC’s denial of her RTAP eligibility. DPP states the position offered her from ARPC was located in Denver, CO but that the Program Manager at DFAS-CO agreed to allow her to perform her IDT’s at the DFAS-San Antonio office thereby providing the same commuting distance she endured when assigned to Kelly AFB, TX.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01767
According to AFRC/A1B, the applicant has not provided sufficient information to validate that she was eligible for early retirement as a result of not being afforded priority placement to an authorized vacancy. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. Therefore, in the absence of substantial evidence the applicant was eligible for early retirement as a result of not being afforded priority...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004520C070205
On 15 October 2002, the applicant was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the USAR Control Group (IMA). The applicant’s records confirm that he was transferred from his USAR unit to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) effective 23 January 2003 by reason of his being beyond reasonable commuting distance (change of residence). Therefore, without evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant was properly transferred from his USAR unit to the USAR...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03595-07
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner a former commissioned officer in the Marine Corps Reserve filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show that he transferred to the Retired Reserve with eligibility for retired pay at age 60 vice the discharge with separation pay now of record. Instead of recommending Petitioner for an early retirement, his unit recommended him for Reserve Involuntary Separation Pay, based on 14 years of qualifying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04790-07
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member who has received an honorary retirement, filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected, in effect, to show that he transferred to the Retired Reserve under the provisions of 10 U.S.C. Apparently believing that he had 20 qualifying years, he requested transfer to the Retired Reserve effective on 1 July 1989. Since he is now 60 years of age, the record should be further corrected to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090554C070212
He was discharged in 1995 with 16 years of qualifying service. He stated that he had completed over 18 years of service in the Army Reserve. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 12 December 1995, the date of his discharge; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 11 December 1998.
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500084
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600141
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Financially I have been left with helping my parents pay their bills, & putting my little brothers through school.”000605: Ltr of unsat participation in the SMCR for drills missed on 000603 and 000604 mailed to SNM’s PMA this date.000607: Applicant administratively reduced in rank for unsatisfactory performance of Reserve training,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057608C070420
APPLICANT STATES : That the US Army Reserve Command denied his SSP in error. The applicant’s request is dated 5 May 2001 and he shows his present military status as Reserve. The evidence clearly shows that warrant officers were not included in the SSP program.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05690-07
In addition, the Board considered an advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, a copy of which is enclosed.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. Reference (a) requests an advisory opinion on ________ petition to correct his record to show he received a reserve retirement from the Marine Corps.2. To qualify fora reserve...