Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08064-06
Original file (08064-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                    2 NAVY ANNEX
                                                       WASHINGTON DC 20370~5100
                                                                                          CRS
 Docket No: 8064-06
18 January 2007


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 18 January 2007. 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 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 existence of 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,

 ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director



Enclosures
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO. VIRGINIA 221 34-51 03



                                                                                 IN REFER TO:
                                                                        MMER/RE
AUG 1 2OO 6

MEMORANDUM FOR THE       EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj: BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF XXX-XX; SUBJ: RECODE

 End:     (1) NANJMC 118 (11)
          (2)      NAVMC    118(11) of 6 Aug 96
         (3)      NAVMC    118(12)
         (4)      NAVMC    118 (12)a
         (5)      NAVMC    118 (12)b
         (6)      NAVMC    118 (12)c
         (7)      NAVMC    118 (12)d


                           DD Form 149 of 7 Jul 06

 1        ‘ service record has been reviewed and it has been determined that at the time of separation he was assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4, which means that he was not recommended for reenlistment. The reenlistment code was correctly assigned and was based on his overall record.

 ~was discharged under other than honorable conditions on August 7, 1996 by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure. A review of the administrative portion of his record indicates that he was counseled concerning harassment of a female service member; lack of discipline; poor judgment; and not being recommended for reenlistment. The disciplinary portion of his record shows he received six nonjudicial punishments under the Uniform Code of Military Justice for offenses that included using provoking speeches or gestures; failure to obey the order of a noncommissioned officer; and numerous incidents of unauthorized absence. Enclosures (1) through (7) pertain.
3.       After a review of all relevant information, this Headquarters concurs in the professional evaluation of qualifications for reenlistment at the time of separatatio n. 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 (8) is returned for final action.

Head, Performance Evaluation
Review Branch
 Personnel Manag er Division 7diiection of the Commandant
 of the Marine Corps

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2006 | 06976-06

    Original file (06976-06.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 | 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 | 09905-06

    Original file (09905-06.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 | 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 | 07051-06

    Original file (07051-06.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 15 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 | 02448-06

    Original file (02448-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 May 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. A minimum average conduct mark of 4.0 was required for a fully honorable characterization of service at the time of separation.

  • 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 | 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 | 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...