Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05186-06
Original file (05186-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                           DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                  BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                     2 NAVY ANNEX
          WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
        


                                                                                          TJR
                                                                                          Docket No: 5186-06
                                                                                                   8 November 2006


 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 7 November 2006. 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, 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 regard, 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 PFE:
 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
                 



MEMORANDUM FOR THE       EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj:    APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF FORMER
         SUBJ: RECODE

 End:     (1) NAVMC 118 (11)
          (2)      NAVMC 118(1l)a
         (3)      NAVMC 118(1l)b
         (4)      NAVMC 118(ll)c
         (5)      NAVMC 118(l1)d
         (6)      NAVI4C 118(12)
         (7) NAVMC 118(12)a     
(8)      XXXXX DD Form 149 of 21 Feb 06

1.       A review of XXXX service record has been completed. It was determined that his reenlistment code of RE-4 was correctly assigned, which means he was not recommended for reenlistment. This reenlistment code was based on his overall record at the time of separation.
2.       2.       XXXXX received an honorable discharge on October 9, 1999. A review of his service record indicates that he was counseled concerning lack of motivation, unauthorized absence, perpetual tardiness, failure to maintain and acceptable level of academic performance, developing pattern of misconduct, nonjudicial punishments, not being recommended for promotion, and failure to obey an order. The disciplinary portion of his record shows he received three nonjudicial punishments for reasons that include: failure to obey an order, making false official statements, unauthorized absence, and insubordinate conduct toward a noncommissioned officer. Enclosures (1) through (7) pertain.
3.       After a review of all relevant information, this Headquarters concurs in the professional evaluation of XXXX 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.






Subj:    BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF FORMER
         SUBJ: RECODE

4.       Enclosure (8) 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 | 07561-06

    Original file (07561-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session considered your application on 1 November 2006. 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. XXXXX service record has been reviewed and it has been determined that his reenlistment code of RE-3C was correctly assigned.

  • 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 | 06160-06

    Original file (06160-06.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 | 00630-06

    Original file (00630-06.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 an advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, a copy of which is enclosed.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 | 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 | CY2006 | 05181-06

    Original file (05181-06.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 6 June 2006, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07814-06

    Original file (07814-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    20370-5100 CRSDocket No: 7814-068 November 2006This is in reference to our application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 155A three-member panel of he Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 November 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05767-06

    Original file (05767-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board also considered the advisory opinion from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 26 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 existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 30 June 1997. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05803-06

    Original file (05803-06.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 30 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 | 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...