Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 05251-04
Original file (05251-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                                    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 CRS
Docket No: 5251-04
9 August 2004

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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2004. 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 17 June 2004, a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient the establish the existence n ot 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.
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 by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). You may apply to NDRB by submitting the attached DD Form 293.
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 PF:
Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
         QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103   
                  IN REPLYREFERTO:
 1040
MMER/RE
 JUN 1 7 2004
MEMOPANDUM FOR THE       EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:    BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF
         SUBJ: RECODE
End:     (1) Commander, MarForRes ltr of 28 Jul 99
 (2)      NAVMC 118 (11)
(3)      NAVMC 118(11)a
(4)      NAVMC iiS(ii)b
 (5)      Form 149 of 11 Mar 04
1.       service record has been reviewed and it has been determined that her reenlistment code of RE-4 was correctly assigned. The reenlistment code was assigned based on her overall record and means that she was not recommended for reenlistment at the time of separation.
2.        was discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions on A ugust 17, 1999 by reason of Failure to Participate. A review of her service record indicates that she was counseled concerning intent to administratively reduce for unsatisfactory participation, failure to meet PET standards, failing a PET, being assigned to the Remedial PT Program, not being recommended for promotion, and unexcused absences.

3.       After a review of all relevant information, this Headquarters concurs in the professional evaluation inflictions 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.       Enclosure (5) is returned for final action.



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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06669-06

    Original file (06669-06.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 25 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 | CY2008 | 04202-08

    Original file (04202-08.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 existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 05016-04

    Original file (05016-04.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In additio~i, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by Hea~quarters Marine Corps dated 14 September and 4 November 004, copies of which are attached. We recommend that Petitioner’s request for relief be denied. 4 Subj: BOARD FOR CORRECT ON OF NAVAL RECORDS (BCNR) APPLICATION Finally, as for Petition~r’s request that her reenlistment code be changed, we concur witFh the Performance Evaluation Review Branch comments that Petltioner’s code was correctly assigned and that the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06961-06

    Original file (06961-06.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 1 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 | CY2005 | 03690-05

    Original file (03690-05.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 9 May 2005, 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 | 08862-06

    Original file (08862-06.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 | 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 | CY2006 | 08064-06

    Original file (08064-06.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 31 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 | CY2009 | 06256-09

    Original file (06256-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 December 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion, from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 11 June 2009, 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 the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 04659-04

    Original file (04659-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 August 1979 you were released from active duty and assigned to a Marine Corps Reserve unit. At that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE—4.Character of service is based, in part, on one’s conduct and proficiency averages, both of which are computed from marks assigned during periodic evaluations. A review of his service record indicates that he was counseled concerning repeated tardiness to morning muster, positive urinalysis results indicating illegal use of THC and...