Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 02637-05
Original file (02637-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                       DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                    BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                2 NAVY ANNEX
                          WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


                                                        SMW
                                                        Docket No: 2637-05
                                                        5 October 2005








      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 5 October
      2005. 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 Navy on 5 August 1975 at age 17 with parental
      consent. On 31 July 1976 you were counseled because of low evaluation
      marks in performance, behavior, appearance, and adaptability. You then
      served without incident for about nine months. However, during the
      period of 9 June to 17 August 1977 you received three nonjudicial
      punishments (NJP’s) for five instances of unauthorized absence (UA)
      totaling about 37 days, and failure to obey a lawful order by breaking
      restriction. On 25 July 1977, while in a UA status, you were
      apprehended by civil authorities and charged with burglary. You were
      later found guilty of criminal trespass.

      On 18 August 1977 the commanding officer initiated administrative
      separation action, and advised you that you were being considered for
      an administrative discharge by reason of unsuitability due to apathy.
      In connection with this processing, you acknowledged the recommended
      separation action and did not object to the discharge. On 24 August
      1977 the separation authority approved the commanding officer’s
      recommendation and directed your




separation with a general discharge. On 7 September 1977, you were so
discharged.

Characterization of service is determined, in part, by military behavior
averages computed from marks assigned on a periodic basis. Your final
military behavior average was 2.65. An average of 3.0 in behavior was
required 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 your
desire for a better discharge. Nevertheless, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your repetitive misconduct and your failure to attain the required
average in military behavior. Therefore, the Board concluded that the
discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

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,




















                                      2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08780-07

    Original file (08780-07.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 June 2008. 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 | 04617-08

    Original file (04617-08.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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged the separation action and that characterization of service would be determined as warranted by your service record. Given your misconduct and failure to attain the overall trait and behavior mark averages required for a fully honorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03093-08

    Original file (03093-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2008. 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. On 11 September 1970, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed discharge by reason of unsuitability, and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 02633-05

    Original file (02633-05.doc) 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 found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct and final military behavior average. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06514-08

    Original file (06514-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 2009. 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 general discharge because of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07199-98

    Original file (07199-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board.for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. The punishment imposed was restriction for 30 On 23 November 1977 you received NJP paygrade E-3 and Your record further reflects that during the period from...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05262-07

    Original file (05262-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Correction of Naval considered your allegations of error and A three-member panel of the Board for Records, sitting in executive session, application on 15 January 2008. 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...

  • 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 | CY2008 | 10629-08

    Original file (10629-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 2009. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07235-08

    Original file (07235-08.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. Given your repetitive misconduct and failure to attain the behavior mark average required for a fully honorable characterization of service, the Board found that your service warranted a general characterization of service, and further noted that you were fortunate to have received such a...