DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No: 1902-01
5 December 2001
This is in reference to your
naval record pursuant to the
States Code section 1552.
application for correction of your
provisions of Title 10 of the United
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 27 November 2001.
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.
Your allegations of error and
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.
You reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 February 1997.
served in an excellent manner for several years.
fitness report for the period 10 January to 5 June 2000 is
adverse and states that you were convicted by a summary
martial on 5 June 2000 of violations of Articles 92 and 125 of
the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Although the summary
court-martial is not file in your record, it appears that the
charges resulted from an inappropriate relationship with a
subordinate Marine, and you were reduced in grade from SGT (E-5)
to CPL (E-4).
follows:
The fitness report comments state, in part, as
However, the
court-
You then
.
.
. Conduct and performance of duty during this period
.
was exemplary. Maintained (a) positive attitude and
behavior throughout adjudication process.
violations.
potential for service;
conduct violation. . . . .
Outstanding performance, demeanor, and
not qualified due to serious
No further
You were honorably discharged on 31 October 2000 and were
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
At that time, you had
five months and seven days of active
completed seven years,
service.
You contend in your application that the assignment of the RE-4
reenlistment code was unjust because it was based on one isolated
incident, you were improperly convicted by the court-martial
after the expiration of your enlistment, your outstanding service
was not properly considered,
concerning the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code.
details of the offense of which you were convicted by the summary
However, the court-martial
court-martial are not available.
proceedings would have been reviewed to confirm jurisdiction and
The Board believed
the legal sufficiency of the proceedings.
summary court-martial conviction and the related adverse
that a
fitness report were sufficient to support the assignment of the
RE-4 reenlistment code.
Accordingly, the Board concluded that
the RE-4 reenlistment code was proper as assigned and no change
is warranted.
and you were never counseled
The
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The names and
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
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,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12456-08
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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Branch (MMER/RE), a copy of which is attached. Subsequently, on 23 January 2001, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01964-00
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and In addition, the Board considered the advisory applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Control (ECFC) policy, According to the Enlisted Career Force sergeants who have twice failed selection to the next higher grade must leave active duty at he end of active service sergeant twice and was therefore denied further service. in order...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201803
Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301254
The Applicant’s service record documents a punitive conviction and punishment, as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, on 17 May 2005. ” 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01894-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 July 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. prior to submitting this request you conferred with a qualified military lawyer at which time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probabl adverse...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201736
- 20120611:For your Panic Disorder without Agoraphobia - 20120614:For your Panic Disorder without Agoraphobia Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201004
The Applicant contends his discharge was based on an isolated incident that occurred years before his discharged date with no other adverse actions in his record.Despite a member’s record of service, certain serious offenseswarrant separation from the Naval services to maintain proper order and discipline.Before going to a Special Court-Martial, the Applicant had received a retention warning and had been found guilty at NJP for violating UCMJ Article 91. Clemency denied.Summary: After a...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801733
The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.To warrant an upgrade based on clemency the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06215-07
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.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.On 2 November 1998, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 19. Given your BCD that resulted from a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04281-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 November 2001. 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 The Board...