Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00697-03
Original file (00697-03.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                             BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                2 NAVY ANNEX
                          WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



                                     CRS
                                                           Docket No: 697-
03
                                                           5 March 2003






     This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval
     record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United States Code,
     Section 1552.

     A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
     sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March
     2003. 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 Headquarters Marine Corps dated 27
     January 2003, 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 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

Enclosure




                           DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                   HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
                              3280 RUSSELL ROAD
                        QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103


                                                         IN REPLY REFER TO:
                                                              1040
                                                              MMER/RE

                                                              JAN 2 72003



     MEMORANDUM FOR THE      EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
                          NAVAL RECORDS

     Subj:  BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF FORMER LANCE CORPORAL



           Encl:           (1)   Mr.          DD Form 149 of 27 Nov 2002


                          1. Mr.  service record has been reviewed and it
     has been determined that his reenlistment code of RE—3P was correctly
     assigned. The reenlistment code was assigned based on his overall
     record and means that he did not meet the physical! medical standards
     for reenlistment at the time of separation.

      2.    Mr.     was discharged on August 15, 1999 by reason of
     Disability.  A review of his service record indicates that he was
     counseled concerning wrongful distribution of  a prescription
     medication, failure to follow proper safety procedures while performing
     duties as a motor vehicle operator, and failure to pay just debts. The
     disciplinary portion of the record shows that he received one
     nonjudicial punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice for
     distributing a prescription medication to other service members. A
     Physical Evaluation Board found Mr.  unfit for duty due to Left L5!Sl
     Radiculopathy Left L5!S1 Disc Bulge and Narrowing of the L5/S1
     Interspace.

     3.     After a review of all relevant information, this Headquarters
     concurs in the professional evaluation of Mr.   qualifications for
     reenlistment at the time of separation. Once a code 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.

     4.     The enclosure is returned for final action.



                                                 Performance Evaluation
                                         Review Branch
                                         Personnel Management Division
                                         By direction of the Commandant
                                         of the Marine Corps

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00725

    Original file (PD2009-00725.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    During the MEB exam on 5 June 2002 five months prior to separation the CI still complained of occasional back pain, some pain in his left foot, occasional left leg pain, and left lower leg numbness. In the matter of the LBP condition, the Board unanimously recommends a disability rating of 20%, coded 5299-5295, IAW VASRD 4.71a. I have reviewed the subject case pursuant to reference (a) and, for the reasons set forth in reference (b), approve the recommendation of the Physical Disability...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01706-07

    Original file (01706-07.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 Headquarters Marine Corps dated 31 January 2007, 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 | CY2003 | 00662-03

    Original file (00662-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 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. 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 | CY2003 | 04316-03

    Original file (04316-03.PDF) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 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. qualifi- Once a code The reenlistment code assigned by the Marine Corps is an 4 .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03074-03

    Original file (03074-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 CRS Doc ,et No: 3074-03 7 M a v 2003 This is in reference to your application for corr'ectlon of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title States Code, section 1552. of the United 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06336-03

    Original file (06336-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your Your allegations of error and application on 10 September 2003. 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 18 July 2003, a copy of which...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00047

    Original file (PD2009-00047.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    After surgery, the CI continued to have symptoms and an MRI documented protrusion of L1-L2, L2-L3 disks as well as L5-S1 disk bulge. The Board also considered the condition of Radiculopathy, Left Lower Extremity and unanimously determined that this condition was not unfitting at the time of separation from service and therefore no rating is applied. On 23 April 2010, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower & Reserve Affairs) took action in your case by accepting the recommendation of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03211-03

    Original file (03211-03.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. The reenlistment code was assigned based on her overall record and means that she did not meet the physical/ medical standards for reenlistment at the time of separation. Once a code The reenlistment code assigned by the Marine Corps is an 4 .

  • 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01808

    Original file (PD2012 01808.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ANALYSIS SUMMARY : The Board evaluates VA evidence proximate to separation in arriving at its recommendations, but its authority resides in evaluating the fairness of fitness decisions and rating determinations for disability at the time of separation.DoDI 6040.44 specifies a 12-month interval for special consideration to VA findings.Post-separation evidence, however, is probative only to the extent that it reasonably reflects the disability at the time of separation from military...