DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
ELP
Docket No. 2447-00
1 March 2001
Dear.
This is in reference to your
naval record pursuant to the
States Code, Section 1552.
application for correction of your
provisions of Title 10, United
Board for Correction of Navy
A three-member panel for the
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 22 February 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.
The Board found that you reenlisted in the Marine Corps on
25 February 1993 for four years as a SGT (E-5).
your reenlistment, you had completed more than six years of
active service.
At the time of
The record reflects that you served without incident until 4 June
1993 when you were convicted by summary court-martial of making a
false official statement and larceny of
Pro-
Sep rations" on diverse occasions from 15 December 1989 to
16 October 1990.
(E-4), a forfeiture of $950, and 57 days of restriction.
Thereafter, you were formally counseled regarding your
misconduct.
You were sentenced to reduction in rank to CPL
VI-IA, FSA, and
"BAQ,
On 30 August 1994 you submitted a request for a humanitarian
transfer to a non-deployable unit due to your wife's severe
You stated that you did not desire to be
mental problems.
considered for a hardship discharge.
The chain of command
recommended that your request be approved.
However, the
Commandant of the Marine Corps denied the request as not meeting
You were advised
the criteria for a humanitarian reassignment.
that you could still request a hardship discharge.
On 1 February 1996 you were advanced again to SGT (E-5). On
31 December 1996, the CMC denied a request to extend your
enlistment, authorized half-separation pay, and directed
assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code.
discharged on 24 February 1997 and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment
code.
You were honorably
An individual must be
Regulations further require the assignment of an
Regulations provide that each Marine must satisfy certain
prereqisities for reenlistment.
recommended for reenlistment by the commanding officer, have no
convictions by a court-martial,
and have no known dependency or
hardship that is not temporary in nature and that would cause the
Marine to be non-deployable or not available for worldwide
assignment.
4 reenlistment code to individuals who are not recommended for
reenlistment.
The Board noted that you desire to serve in the
reserves but are unable to do so with an RE-4 reenlistment code.
Although you were advanced again to SGT,
that given your summary court-martial conviction you were no
longer competitive with your peers for further advancement or
assignments of increased responsibility.
The Board concluded
that your summary court-martial conviction and family problems
which caused you to be nondeployable provided sufficient
justification to warrant a non-recommendation for reenlistment
and the
The fact
that you desire to serve in the reserves does not provide a valid
basis for changing a correctly assigned reenlistment code.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
CMC's assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code.
RE-
it appeared to the Board
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,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04367-07
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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters United States Marine Corps (MMER), 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 | CY1999 | 07468-98
The Board found that you reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 November 1985 for six years as a SGT (E-5). Rules for Courts-Martial A promulgating order (RCM) the Board carefully reviewed In its review of your application, your record for any mitigating factors which might warrant removing the general court-martial from your record and restoring you to your original date of rank of SGT. the Board noted your contention to the effect that the general court-martial is nullified because the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05187-99
opinions from Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) dated 20 December copies of which are attached. to this Board, the Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) at HQMC has removed this comment from your last The Board first considered your contentions of error concerning the NJP of 10 January 1996, specifically, that although the service record entry of 8 ,January 1996 shows that the advice 5 M.J. 238 (CMA 1977) was required by United States v. Booker, given, it does not state that this advice...
USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00628
The applicant’s overall service record and positive attitude he displayed after his court-martial were likely factors that contributed to the separation authority granting a discharge under honorable conditions (general), rather than under other than honorable conditions. He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04690-99
You were so discharged on 15 July The commanding officer noted In its review of your application the Board conducted a careful search of your service and medical records for any evidence showing you were wounded in action while serving in Vietnam. you were transferred from Vietnam, request to CMC to see if you were reported to have been wounded in action on 26 March 1966. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10413-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2003. At that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4. The Board did not consider whether the characterization of service or reason for your separation should be changed, since you did not ask for such consideration and you have not exhausted your administrative remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge and Review Board (NDRB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10717-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 15 January 2002 you were honorably discharged by reason of expiration of enlistment and assigned an RE-30 reenlistment code, as directed by CMC. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901187
Based on the documentation in his service and medical records, the Board determined his claim of an erroneous discharge is without merit.The NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons. In the absence of supporting documentation or evidence, the Board determines his claims of racism and lack of support from his command are without merit.Summary: After a thorough review of the available...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500637
(Encl (16)) .After having my discharge upgraded I will be able to get a good job, get a home, and have more affordable college therefore I can get my life back on track. The Applicant is advised that humanitarian transfers are initiated at the request of the individual Marine and are addressed to the Commandant of the Marine Corps (MMEA) via the Marine's chain of command. In the Applicant's case, the record shows:o award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 20 010318 and 20020509 for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07033-00
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...