DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
- WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Cre
Docket No: 400-10
3 February 2010
“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 3 February 2010. 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 comments
‘furnished in a letter by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 7 August
2008, 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 letter.
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 request such consideration and you have not exhausted your
administrative remedies by applying to the Naval Discharge Review
Board (NDRB). You may do so by submitting the attached DD Form
293 to the NDRB. ©
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,
WwW. NY PF
Executive Di or
Enclosures
87/07/2087 85:42 7B36144624 TAXCENTER PAGE 62/7?
5730
i MMER/RE
' 7 Aug 08
MSRA DEPARTMENT COMMENT on OLAC route sheet of 24 July 2008
Subj: CONGRINT; CASE OF
SUBJ: RECODE
lL. The following is provided for inclusion in your reply:
On July 12, 1997 waitin, was discharged Under other Than
Honorabie Conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation in the
ready reserve. At the time of seperation, @# ; Woes assigned a
reenlistment code of RE-4, which indicates he Was not recommended for
reenlistment. Furthermore, he was assigned a Separation Code of HSG1
for failure to participate (Reserve not on active duty (board waved}.
It is also noted that on March 24, 1995 he gigned for acknowledgement
letter explaining his rights during separation proceedings. The
letter clearly explained that he was recommended for administrative
discharge for his continued unauthorized absence, The letter also
addressed his characterization of service. After review of all
relevant information, we concur with the professional evaluation of
we goclifications for reenlistment at the time of
separation. Since his reenlistment code is’ correctly assigned, no
change is warranted. Once a code is correctly assigned it is not
routinely changed ox upgraded as a result of events that ocour after
separation or based merely on the passage of time.
; — disagrees with the justification and rationale for
this determination, he has the right to petition the Board for
Correction of Naval Records to conduct an additional review. This may
be done by submitting the enclosed Application for Correction of
Military Record (DD Form 149) to the Chairman, Board for Correction of
Naval Records, Department of the Navy, Washington, DC 20370-5100. To
demonstrate to BCNR that he has exhausted all available administrative
remedies, it is necessary that a copy of this Headquarters’ response
to Congresswoman Virginia Foxx be attached to this application,
2. Point,of contract is MSgt J. J. Castleyerry at (703) 784-9205/04.
"
ances S, Poleto
By direction
Encl: (1) DD Form.149
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07796-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | CY2008 | 05165-08
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 Board did not consider whether your characterization of service or reason for separation should be changed, since you have not exhausted your administrative remedies by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03607-09
Documentary evidence 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 ‘@xistence of probabfe material error or injustice. After a review of all relevant information, we concur with the _ professional evaluation of QED qualifications for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06256-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 December 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion, from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 11 June 2009, a copy of which is attached. 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 | CY2008 | 04202-08
Documentary evidence 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 material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05732-03
your United In addition, the Board considered the advisory This is in reference to your application for correction of naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the States Code, section A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2003. opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 8 July 2003, a copy of which is attached. 'service record has been reviewed and it has 1. been...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02807-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 28 March 2003, a copy of which is attached. overall record and means that he was not recommended for reenlistment at the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05181-06
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 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 | 06655-06
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05311-06
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 12 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...