Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05843-02
Original file (05843-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 TJR
 Docket No: 5843-02
27 February 2003


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 25 February 2003. 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 Naval Reserve on 4 October 1965 at the age of 22 and served on active duty for nearly a year without incident. However, on 13 September 1966, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of an eight day period of unauthorized absence (UA). You were sentenced to reduction to paygrade E-2, which was suspended for six months, and a $67 forfeiture of pay.
Your record contains an adminis~trative remarks entry dated 16 July 1967, which states that you were not recommended for reenlistment due to deficiencies in your attitude and initiative and a lack of potential for retention.
On 15 August 1967, within three months of the expiration of your obligated service, you were released from active duty under honorable conditions. On 2 July 1971, at the expiration of your enlistment, you received a general discharge.
Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and overall trait averages which are computed from marks assigned during periodic evaluations. Your conduct average was 2.93. An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, and your request to have the SCM expunged from your record. The Board also considered your contentions that a simple statement resulted in your security clearance being removed, you were unjustly subjected to ostracism and blatant provocation by your superior officers, and you were also subjected to demeaning and intimidating circumstances which led to an attitude of hopelessness. It also considered your contention concerning the period of UA that led to your conviction by SCM. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct and since your conduct average was insufficiently high to warrant an honorable discharge. Further, the Board has no authority to consider your request to remove the SCM. 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,


W.       DEAN PFEIFFER
 Executive Director

















2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02500-09

    Original file (02500-09.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 January 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, - and policies. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given your two...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01433-10

    Original file (01433-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 2010. 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 concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00907-09

    Original file (00907-09.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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant upgrading your discharge given your two SCM’s, conviction by SPCM, and failure to attain the required average in cohduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07609-10

    Original file (07609-10.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 separation for a fully honorable characterization of service. Further, Marines with an extensive record of misconduct, such as yours, normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and as such the Board noted...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07620-02

    Original file (07620-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 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. 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 | CY2008 | 02847-08

    Original file (02847-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 December 2008. Given your disciplinary actions, failure to attain the minimum behavior mark average required to form the basis for a fully honorable characterization of service, and since you have been treated no differently than others in your situation, the Board found that your service warranted a general characterization of service. Nevertheless, the Board...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05573-01

    Original file (05573-01.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 August 2001. 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. Your record...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11235-06

    Original file (11235-06.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.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 Navy on 10 August 1964 at age 17. About seven months later, on 25 July 1967, you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00627 12

    Original file (00627 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 October 2012. 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. At the time of your service, a conduct mark average of 3.00 was required for a fully honorable characterization of service.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10415-02

    Original file (10415-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 2003. separation by reason of unsuitability, stating in part, that further retention in the service would not be in the best interest of the Navy. 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.