Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02943-00
Original file (02943-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

TRG
Docket No: 2943-00
23 August 2001

Dear

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.

Your allegations of  error and injustice were reviewed

A three-member panel of the Board for  Correction  of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21
August 2001.
in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board.
considered by the Board consisted of your application, together
with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record
In addition,
and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters
Marine Corps, dated, 10 July 2001, a copy of which is enclosed.

Documentary material

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
Accordingly, your
comments contained in the advisory opinion.
application has been denied.
the panel will be furnished upon request.

The names and votes of the members of

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
Consequently, when
regularity attaches to all official records.
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

)

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV

.z:.
HEADGUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

Y

3280 RUSSELL ROAD

GUANTICO. VIRGINIA 22134-5103

!

IN REPLY REFER TO:

1040
MMER/RE
?QQ\
10 
3Ul 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,  

NAVAL RECORDS

HOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

Subj:

CASE OF FORMER CORPORAL

.service

record has been reviewed and it has
1. Mr.
been determined that his reenlistment code of RE-4 was correctly
assigned.
overall record and means that he was not recommended for
reenlistment at the time of separation.

The reenlistment code was assigned based on his

was honorably discharged on March 6, 1995 by

2.  Mr.
reason of Weight Control Failure.
portion of his service record indicates that he was counseled
concerning being assigned to the Weight Control Porgram, and not
making satisfactory progress on the program.

A review of the administrative

After a review of all relevant

3.
concurs in the professional evaluation of Mr.
cations for 
is correctly assigned it is not routinely changed or upgraded as
a result of events that occur after separation or based merely on
the passage of time.

reen.listment  at the time of separation.

information

dquarters
qualifi-
Once a code

The reenlistment code assigned by the Marine Corps is an

4.
administrative marking which reflects the member's acceptability
for reenlistment at the time of separation from the Marine Corps.
The code may, however,
acquiring branch of service per their own policies and
regulations.

be waived at the discretion of the

Performance Evaluation

Head,
Review Branch
Personnel Management Division
By direction of the Commandant
of the Marine Corps



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05415-06

    Original file (05415-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02416-03

    Original file (02416-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2003. 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 reenlistment code assigned by the Marine C*orps is an administrative marking which reflects the member's acceptability for reenlistment at the time...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10049-06

    Original file (10049-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06164-06

    Original file (06164-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 dated 10 July 2006, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05209-06

    Original file (05209-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03364-03

    Original file (03364-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 2003. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 16 February 1996 you received 'a general discharge by reason of llinvoluntary discharge directed by established directive^.^^ At that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4. The reenlistment code was assigned based on his overall record and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07033-00

    Original file (07033-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 February 2001. were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Additionally, an individual cannot be promoted if he is not within the Marine Corps height and weight standards. P1400.32B, Marine Corps Promotion Manual, Volume 2, Enlisted Promotions, provides that Marines assigned RE-3P...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07760-07

    Original file (07760-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Headquarters, Marine Corps, Performance Evaluation Review Branch dated 20 August 2007, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01399-01

    Original file (01399-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, copies of which are enclosed. You also received The Board believed that even The Accordingly, your application has been denied. VIRGINIA 22 134-5 103 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS CASE OF...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06460-03

    Original file (06460-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2003. 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. opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps undated, a copy of which is attached.