Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01745-99
Original file (01745-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
D E P A R T M E N T  O F  T H E  N A V Y  
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 

2 NAVY ANNEX 

WASHINGTON DC  20370-5100 

CRS 
Docket No:  1745-99 
12 August 1999 

Dear 

This is in reference to your application tor correction of your 
naval record pursuant to the provisions ofi 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 11 August 1999.  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 that the evidence submitted was 
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material 
error or injustice. 

The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 5 January 1976 
at age 19.  Your record reflects that on 12 August 1976 you 
received nonjudicial punishment for unauthorized absences 
totalling 49 days.  On 19 August 1976 you received a general 
discharge by reason of convenience of the government due to a 
reduction in authorized strength. 

Character of service is based, in part, on one's  conduct and 
overall trait averages, both of which are computed from marks 
assigned during periodic evaluations.  Your conduct and overall 
trait averages were both 2.8.  A minimum average conduct mark of 
3.0  was required for a fully honorable characterization of 
service at the time of your separation. 

In its review of your application the Boar  carefully weighed all 
potentially mitigating factors, such as yo r youth and 
immaturity.  However, the Board concluded that these factors were 
not sufficient to warrant recharacterizatian of your discharge 
g i v ~ n  your d'-yiplinary action and since your conduct agerage was 

1 

insufficiently high to warrant a fully hon rable discharge. 
Accordingly, your application has been den ed.  The names and 
votes of the members of the panel will be  urnished 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. 

W.  DEAN PFEIFFER 
Executive Director 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 05737-98

    Original file (05737-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board c~nsisted 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 | CY1999 | 00675-99

    Original file (00675-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 August 1999. 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 found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your general discharge given your record of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10392-02

    Original file (10392-02.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. An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is existence of probable on the applicant to demonstrate the material error or...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03242-99

    Original file (03242-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 1999. 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 found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your extensive...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06136-02

    Original file (06136-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2003. A minimum average conduct mark of 3.0 was required for a fully honorable characterization of service at the time of separation. 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 | CY2002 | 08750-02

    Original file (08750-02.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 2002. 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. Nevertheless, the Board found the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01832-99

    Original file (01832-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all materi 1 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. However, th+ Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant rec aracterization of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02150-99

    Original file (02150-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 1999. 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 | CY2002 | 09446-02

    Original file (09446-02.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. An average of 4.0 in conduct was required at the time of your discharge for a fully honorable characterization of service. 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 | CY1999 | 00773-99

    Original file (00773-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member 'panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 1999. 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...