DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 §. COURTHOUSE ROAD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490
BAN
Docket No.NRO1774-13
9 June 2014
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 9 June 2014.
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. The Board also carefully considered the advisory opinion
provided by the Marine Corps Recruiting Command (MCRC) memo 5730, G-3 of
7 Oct 2013, and MCRC memo 5000, G-7 of 22 Apr 2014, copies of which were
previously provided to you through counsel, and which are now enclosed.
The Board also considered your counsel’s responses, dated 4 November 2013
and 4 June 2014, to the advisory opinions.
Additionally, you also requested a personal appearance before the Board.
‘rhe Board members considered your request for a personal appearance,
however, they found that the issue in the case was adequately documented
and that a personal appearance with or without counsel would not
materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.
Thus, your request for a personal appearance has been denied. .
Your application requested, essentially, that your education debt be set
aside. The Board carefully considered all of the arguments raised in
your application and the evidence your counsel submitted regarding those
claims. However, the Board was not persuaded by any of the arguments
your counsel made or the evidence you submitted that your debt should be
set aside. 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
making this determination, the Board substantially concurred with the
comments contained in the advisory opinions. Therefore, your application
Docket No.NRO1774-13
has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
furnished upon request.
Finally, the Board did note that you are still entitled to serve an
military service in lieu of paying your educational debt. If you choose
to do so, you may request an administrative correction through DFAS once
your obligation in service has been satisfied for a waiver of your
educational debt.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that more
favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board
reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or
other matters 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,
7 eS Tan
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosures
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8872 13
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. The Board carefully considered all of the arguments raised in your application and the evidence your counsel submitted regarding those claims. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden ig on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5420 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 2015. Accordingly, your application to reduce your contract term to reflect 4 years, as well as your request for a personal appearance before the Board, have been denied. New evidence is evidence Docket No.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10370-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August 2009. In August 2006, the Navy Personnel Command directed that you show cause before a board of inquiry (BOI) as to why you should be retained in the Naval service. Your resignation letter specifically noted that you understood that, if your resignation was accepted you “shall subsequently receive a certificate of general discharge” and that you “could be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5733 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 2014. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by MCRC Memo 5400 G-3/0A dated Qa 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 | CY2014 | NR1221 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2014. in addition, the Board consigered the advisory opinion furnished by MCRC memo 1610 G-i dated 30 April 2014, a COPY of which 1s attached. Consequentiy, 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 | CY2010 | 07773-10
On or about 13 March 2006, you appeared before a Performance Review Board {PRB} convened to inquire into your aptitude and performance. In the Board's view, your request to disenroll was a voluntary decision made of your own free will. Docket No._7773-10 were aware that you could continue in the NROTC program as well.?
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6992 13
In enclosure (2), the Headquarters Marine Corps Judge Aavocate Division (JAR7) commented to the effect that Petitioner's request regarding the contested documentation, which reflects he was disenrolled from the MECEP for domestic violence and substandard performance, has merit and warrants favorable action because of administrative errors in his disenroklment. c. In enclosure (3), the MCRC commented to the effect that Petitioner should not be reinstated into the MECEP, stating that “this...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5624 14
Pursuant to its regulations, the Board determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. His transfer fitness report from RS Harrisburg, for 1 January to 13 July 2013 (copy at enclosure (1)), was fully favorable, even though the reporting senior, the Commanding Officer (CO), RS Harrisburg, requested Petitioner’s RFC on 12 April 2013, and the reviewing officer, the CO, First Marine Corps District, favorably endorsed the request on 26...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05607-08
DEPARTMENT BOARD FOR CORRECTION 2 NAVY A WASHINGTON DC This is in reference the applicati mMaval record pursuant to the provi | | IA three-member panel of the Board Records, sitting in executive/ sess application on 24 November 2008. injustice were reviewed in ac¢orda regulations and procedures applica Board. Documentary material ¢onsi regulations and policies. your ¥ 1 t After careful and conscientious c record, the Board found that the insufficient to establish the exi error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9215 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2014. Thus, your request for a personal appearance has been denied. 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.