DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5700
Lc ,
Docket No. 3620-09
6 Jul ag
Dear oie
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 July 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
the advisory opinion furnished by CMC memorandum 7200 MPO-40 of
28 May 2009, 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 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.
Enclosure Bxecutive Di
'
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VA 22134-5103
IN REPLY REFER TQ;
' 7200
, MPO-40
28 May 2009
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
NAVAL RECORDS
Subj: BCNR, Docket No. 3620-09, application Ico?
1. DODFMR, Vol 7A, chapter 1 states that in order to qualify for
the special rate of basic pay for pay grades O-1E, O-2E, and 0-35
a commissioned officer in pay grades O-1 through 0-3 must have
been credited with over 4 years (i.e., at least 4 years and 1
day) of prior active service as an enlisted member.
2. In the case of QAR bis cecord reflects he has
not served at least 4 years and i day of prior active service as
an enlisted member. As such, SNO does not qualify for the
special rate of basic pay for pay grades O-1F, O-2E, and 0-38.
3. The Marine Corps point of contact is Major Gulbrandsen, DSN:
278-9386, Comm: (703) 784-9386, Email: paul.gulbrandsen@usmc.mil.
Wfoml>
W. A. TOSICK
Colonel
U.S. Marine Corps
Branch Head
Manpower Military Policy
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01124-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on a3 March 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. 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 | CY2005 | 10334-05
They agreed with the reasoning of the Claims Appeal Board that “in the absence of proof that (you) spent the erroneous per-diem payments for their intended purpose, waiver of the remaining $17,351.26 is not appropriate.” Thus they found no error or injustice in the action to recoup the $17,351.26 in erroneous per-diem payments.Accordingly, your application has been denied. The activation orders authorized per diem; however, the Marine Corps cannot be liable for the erroneous actions of its...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06399-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by CMC memorandums 1920 MMSR-3 of 16 May 2008 and 1050 MPO-40 -of 8 August 2008, a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03015-01
On 15 June 2000, Petitioner was issued a Military Protective Order (MPO) directing him to have no contact with a female Marine. suicidal ideations provided a reasonable basis for the issuing authority in Petitioner's case to consider the ex of an MPO necessary. Petitioner's commanding officer, therefore, In this case, that Commanding officers have f. We note, however, that the forfeiture awarded Petitioner authorizes's forfeiture 5b(2) States (2000 Part V, paragraph 5c(8), MCM forfeitures...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2358 14
This is in reference to your application fo naval record A three-member panel of the Board e session, mber 2014. accordance with administrative Records, sitting in executiv application on 30 Septe injustice were reviewed in regulations and procedures appl Board. ‘3.E, Members may check TES periodically for status of their application.” There is no evidence that you entered the TEB website to transfer your benefits. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02169-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 May 2006. 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. During that period, Oahu, Hawaii was authorized an overseas COLA and was a member without dependents and was residing in the barracks.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05942-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 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. 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 | CY2014 | NR876 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2014. Because of a civil court case Secretary of the Navy was directed to reconsider his decision made in the Records (BCNR) to consider your case regarding your forced retirement per the FY09 Colonel SRB. 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 | CY2009 | 03915-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on , 23 November 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, In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by HQOMC Memo 1050 MPO-40 dtd 5 Nov 09, a copy of which is attached. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09297-04
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 2005. 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. We have been requested to provide an advisory opinion on application requesting payment of accrued leave prior to his General Courts Martial.