Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05157-03
Original file (05157-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 5157-03
27 August 2003




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.

A three member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 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. The Board also considered the advisory opinion from Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 11 June 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.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 29 April 1999 after three years of prior active Navy service. The record reflects that you received two nonjudicial punishments. The offenses included an unauthorized absence of a day, making a false official statement, and use of marijuana.

On 7 March 2000 the commanding officer recommended that you be separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. When informed of the recommendation, you elected to waive the right to present your case to an administrative discharge board. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and, on 20 April 2000, you received an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. At that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE—4B.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity and your rebuttal to the advisory opinion. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reason for discharge, given your involvement with drugs. The Board also concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. Since you have been treated no differently than others in your situation, the Board could not find an error or injustice in the assignment of your reenlistment code.

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























2
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
        QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103

                                                      IN REPLY REFER TO:
                  1040
                                                                                  MMER/ RE
                                                                                 JUN 11 2003

MEMORANDUM FOR THE       EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:    BCNR APPLICATION THE CASE OF FORMER
         SUBJ: RECODE
         
         End: (1)         sDD Form 149 of 26 Apr 2003

 service record has been reviewed and it has been determined that his reenlistment code of RE-4B was correctly assigned. The reenlistment code was assigned based on his overall record and means that he was not recommended for reenlistment due to in-service drug involvement.
2.       was discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions on April 20, 2000 by reason of Misconduct. A review of the administrative portion of his service record indicates that he was counseled concerning frequent violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and not being recommended for reenlistment. The disciplinary portion of the record shows that he received two nonjudicial punishments under the Uniform Code of Military Justice for offenses which included making false official statements, wrongful use of THC, and
unauthorized absence.
3.       After a review of all relevant information, this Headquarters concurs in the professional evaluation of qualifications f or 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.




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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02492-03

    Original file (02492-03.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. your application, together with all material submitted in support your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations thereof, and policies. Y MARINE CORP S D 134.5 103 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1040 MMER/RE 8 2003 MAR 1 MEMORANDUM'FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj: Encl: FORMER SUBJ: DD Form 149 of 30 Dee 2002 s...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03072-03

    Original file (03072-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2003. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 8 April 2003, a copy of which is attached. The Board did not consider whether your characterization of service or reason for separation should be changed, since you did not ask for such consideration and you have not exhausted your administrative remedy...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03607-09

    Original file (03607-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary evidence 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 ‘@xistence of probabfe material error or injustice. After a review of all relevant information, we concur with the _ professional evaluation of QED qualifications for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00587-07

    Original file (00587-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 CRSDocket No: 587-0720 March 2007This 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.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 February 2007. The Board also considered the advisory opinion from Headquarters...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07621-07

    Original file (07621-07.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 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 | 03682-06

    Original file (03682-06.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 19 April 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 | 05205-06

    Original file (05205-06.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 8 June 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 | 07550-06

    Original file (07550-06.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 16 August 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 | CY2003 | 03668-03

    Original file (03668-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 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 | 05732-03

    Original file (05732-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    your United In addition, the Board considered the advisory This is in reference to your application for correction of naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the States Code, section A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2003. opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 8 July 2003, a copy of which is attached. 'service record has been reviewed and it has 1. been...