Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07814-06
Original file (07814-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEP RTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WA HINGTON DC. 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 7814-06
 8 November 2006


This 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 155

A three-member panel of he Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 November 2006. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed n 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 24 .August 2006, a copy of which is attached.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found hat the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. In his 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 he panel will be furnished upon request.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot e 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 regulation 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
D PARTMENT OF THE NAVY
I-IEADQUA TERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QU NTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103
                                             IN REPLY REFER TO:
                                                                                                             1040
                                                                                                            MMER/RE
                                                                                                            AUG 24 2006

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

 End:     (1)      NAVMC 118 (11) a
 (2)      NAVMC 118 (11) b
(3)      NAVMC 118 (11) c
(4)      NAVMC 10132 of 26 Oct 04
(5)      NAVMC 10132 of 13 Apr 05
 (6)      DD Form 149 of 9 Aug 06
1.       1. XXXX service record has been reviewed and it has been determined that at the time of separation he was assigned a reenlistment code of Rp-4, which means that he was not recommended for reen1isti~nent. The reenlistment code was Correctly assigned and wish based on his overall record.
2.       XXXX was honorably discharged on October 26, 2005 by reason of completion of required active service. A review of his service record indicates that he was counseled concerning an established pattern of misconduct; driving with an expired registration; not having the registration in his vehicle; failing to register his vehicle; failing to show proof of financial responsibility of the vehicle he was driving; failure to appear at scheduled court dates for traffic violations; unauthorized absence; fraternization; and adultery. The disciplinary portion of his record shows he received two nonjudicial punishments under the Uniform Code of Military Justice for offenses that included unauthorized absence, willfully disobeying orders, fraternization, and engaging in sexual intercourse with a woman not his wife. Enclosures (1) through (5) pertain.
3.       After a review of all relevant information, this Headquarters concurs in the professional evaluation of 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.       Enclosure (6) 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 06138-06

    Original file (06138-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5100 CRSDocket No: 6138-0621 September 2006This 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 f or Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 September 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05186-06

    Original file (05186-06.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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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...