DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
_ 2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 ,
TUR
Docket No: 12456-08
4 August 2009
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 4 August 2009. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 the Marine
Corps Performance Evaluation Review Branch (MMER/RE), 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 enlisted in the Marine Corps in May 1999 at age 19 and began
a period of active duty on 21 May 1999. About eight months
later, on 18 January 2000, you were hospitalized due to
depression and placed on suicide watch.
You served without disciplinary incident until 6 June 2000, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an 11 day period of
unauthorized absence (UA). On 18 August 2000 you received NUP
for disrespect. Shortly thereafter, on 22 November 2000, you
were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of absence from
your appointed place of duty, a five day period of UA, two
specifications of disrespect, failure to obey a lawful order, and
wrongful appropriation of an automobile valued at $16,000.
Subsequently, on 23 January 2001, you were notified of pending
administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense. After consulting with legal
counsel you waived your right to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 27 February 2001 your
commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge
by reason of.misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
On 8 March 2001 the discharge authority approved the foregoing
recommendation, and on 21 March 2001, you were so discharged and
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, desire to upgrade your discharge, and change your
narrative reason for separation and reenlistment code so that you
may reenlist in the armed forces. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge or change your narrative
reason for separation or reenlistment code because of the
seriousness of your misconduct which resulted in two NJPs and a
court-martial conviction. Further, you were given an opportunity
to defend yourself, but waived your procedural right to present
your case to an ADB. Finally, the Board substantially concurred
with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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,
\p Wiad
W. DEAN PFELHEE
Executive Di tor
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VA 22134-6103
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1040
MMER/RE
i7 Dec 08
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj: BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF FORMER §
WRENNER: SUBS: RE-CODE
Encl: (1} NavMC 118 (11)
(2} NavMC 118 (12)
(3} DD Form 2329
(4) DD Form 274
(5) ca, 1* MarDiv’s ltr 1910/17 of 8 Mar O01
(6) einai Bee 151) Form 149 of 16 Sep 68
1, seers service record has been reviewed and it has been determined
that at the time of separation he was assigned a reenlistment code cf RE-4,
which means not recommended for reenlistment. The reenlistment code was
assigned based on administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense.
Pati: released from active service from the U.S. Marine Corps
Under Other Than Honorable Conditions on March 21, 2001 for commission of a
serious offense. The administrative portion of his record shows that he
received numerous counseling addressing his sub-standard behavior. The
disciplinary portion of his record shows that he received two Non-Judicial
Punishment and one Summary Court-Martial for violating articles 86xx2
(unauthorized absence), 89 (disrespect towards a senior commissioned officer)
91x%3 (insubordinate conduct towards NCO), and 121 {larceny} of the Uniform
Code of Military Justice.
3. After a review of all relevant information, this Headquarters concurs in
the, professional evaluation of ail ; 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 on merely on the passage of time.
4. Enclosure (6) is returned for final action. ne
hie
Frances S. Poleto
Head, Performance Evaluation
Review Branch
Manpower Management Division
By the direction of the Commandant —
’ of the Marine Corps
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08096-06
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 | CY2001 | 03156-01
You also made new requests to remove your relief for cause from recruiting duty, which was requested on 5 April 1999; your nonjudicial punishment of 29 March 1999; and your service record page 11 counseling entries dated 17 and 24 February 1999. We are asked to provide an advisory opinion on Petitioner's request for the removal from his Service Record Book (SRB) and his official military personnel file (OMPF) of all references to his nonjudicial punishment (NJP) of 29 March 1999 and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05767-06
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 | CY2007 | 09032-07
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 the Headquarters, Marine Corps, Performance Evaluation Review Branch dated 20 March 2007, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06460-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2003. 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. opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps undated, a copy of which is attached.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06279-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion, from Headquarters Marine Corps, dated, 11 June 2009, a copy of which is attached. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, and notwithstanding the advisory opinion, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04078-00
action occurred on 30 June 1987 since administrative separation action was initiated on that same day due to your disciplinary actions, and other than the NJP of that day, the most recent such action was in January 1987, Additionally, it seems clear that some sort of disciplinary more than five months earlier. Point of contact is Mr. NAVMC re&est for removal 118(12) page 12 entries Director Manpower Management Information Systems Division 3 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01705-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5 100TJRDocket No: 1705-07 5 September 2007This 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 5 September 2007. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08064-06
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 | CY2002 | 06732-00
118(11)"e", page 11 entry plication and Sergeant P1070.12J, Marine Corps Individual Records Administration (IRAM), authorizes commanders to make entries on page 11 One of the many leadership tools that a commander has at Marine Corps policy is that reasonable efforts at MC0 2. equest for removal 118(11)"e" page 11 b. Disapprove Staff Sergeant equest that the statement dated (2), be This document does not meet the guidelines 4010.2e of the IRAM and paragraph 6106 of 17Jun00,...