Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07716-06
Original file (07716-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

CRS
Docket No: 7716-06

6 February 2008

 

 

Dear CTR,

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 6 February 2008. 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 advisory /
opinions furnished by the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery dated 23
January 2007, and Headquarters Marine Corps dated 15 March 2007,
copies of which are attached, and your rebuttal thereto.

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 opinions.
Although there are several minor errors in the advisory opinions,
the Board found them to be insignificant. It concluded that you
were properly discharged at the expiration of your obligated
service because of your failure to meet applicable reenlistment
criteria. You were not discharged for cause. The Board also
concluded that as service members do not have a right to
reenlist, there is no basis for granting your request for

reinstatement to active duty.

The phrase “bar to reenlistment” is a term of art used by
officials of the Department of the Army, and is not applicable to
your case. The Board presumed, however, that you wanted it to

assign you a more favorable reentry code than RE-4. It noted
that you received that code because the Commandant of the Marine

Corps (CMC) determined that you would not be permitted to
reenlist. As you have not demonstrated that the denial of your

request for reenlistment is erroneous or unjust, the Board did
not recommend that your reentry code be changed to a more

favorable one.
In view of the foregoing, 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,

Nearer

Executive tor

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01384-07

    Original file (01384-07.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. The reenlistment code assigned by the Marine Corps is an administrative marking which reflects the member’s acceptability for reenlistment at the time of separation from the Marine Corps. Enclosure (3) is returned for final action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06703-07

    Original file (06703-07.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 9 August 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 | CY2013 | NR3348 13

    Original file (NR3348 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2014. On 15 October 2008, you were discharged in pay grade E-2 with a general characterization of service due to misconduct, and assigned an RE-4 reentry code. 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 | CY2009 | 00140-09

    Original file (00140-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2009. Accordingly, and as RE-3P is the most favorable reentry code that may be assigned to a Marine discharged by reason of a personality disorder, your application has been denied. 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 | CY2014 | NR6324 14

    Original file (NR6324 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2015. 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 this regard, you were assigned the most appropriate reentry code based on your circumstances.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06502-08

    Original file (06502-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 2008. In your application, you also requested that the date of your discharge be changed to 10 December 2007 since that is the date you contend that you were discharged. 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 | CY2007 | 10679-07

    Original file (10679-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. You requested an advisory opinion (hereinafter “Applicant”) application, docket #10679-07, which requested invalidation of a non-judicial punishment (NJP) and restoration of his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13144-10

    Original file (13144-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2011. 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 | CY2006 | 05178-06

    Original file (05178-06.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 letter furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) dated 25 September 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06155-06

    Original file (06155-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    06155-06 11 May 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 10 May 2007. In addition, it considered an advisory opinion provided by officials of Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps, dated 14 July 2006, a copy of which is attached.After careful and...