Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0452 14
Original file (NR0452 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

BC
Docket No: 00452-14
22 May 2014

 

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 21 May 2014. 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.

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 and began a period of active
duty on 7 April 2008. On 31 December 2008, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for being in an unauthorized
absence (UA) status for 122 days. You were separated on 6
August 2012, with an honorable discharge and assigned an RE-3C
(reenlistment authorized by the Commandant of the Marine Corps
only) reentry code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors present in
your case. However, the Board found those factors were
insufficient to warrant any change in your reentry code, given
your record of NJP for misconduct. The Board also noted that
you were fortunate to receive an honorable discharge since a
separation under other than honorable conditions is often
directed when an individual is found to have committed

misconduct. Accordingly, 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,

SQ Aa

ROBERT Dl~ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0446 14

    Original file (NR0446 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 21 May 2014. 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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0649 14

    Original file (NR0649 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 18 June 2014. 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. You were separated on 15 July 2011, with an honorable discharge due to non-retention on active duty and assigned an RE-3C (when directed by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0534 14

    Original file (NR0534 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 21 May 2014. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors present in your case. 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 | NR0684 14

    Original file (NR0684 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 14 May 2014. The Board recommended that you research the possibility of becoming a drilling member of the Marine Corps Reserve. 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 | NR0334 14

    Original file (NR0334 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 30 July 2014. 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 | 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 | CY2014 | NR0454 14

    Original file (NR0454 14.pdf) 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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0298 14

    Original file (NR0298 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 12 March 2014. 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. present in your case, such as your many years of honorable service.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1900 14

    Original file (NR1900 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 13 August 2014. After careful and conscienticus consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish 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 demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR632 14

    Original file (NR632 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 25 June 2014. 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. 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...