Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03925-07
Original file (03925-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

                                                      SMW
                                                                                           Docket No: 3925-07
                                                                                          18 December 2007

From:    Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:      Secretary of the Navy
Subj REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD

Ref:     (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
End:     (1) Case Summary
 (2)      Subject s navel
1, Pursuant to the provisions , of reference (a) Petitjor 1 ei a former enlisted member of the United States Navy, applied to this Board requesting an upgrade of the under honorable characterization of service that he received on 20 October 1969.
2. The Board, consisting of Ms. M r., and reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 12 December 2007, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
3.       The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice finds as follows:
a.       Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b.       Although Petitioner’s application was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and review the application on its merits.
c.       On 24 June 1966, Petitioner enlisted in the Navy at age 20. At that time, he had completed 12 years of education of which he repeated one grade and attained a Mental Group V entrance test score, which is the lowest possible.



d.       On 16 March 1968, a service record entry was made, which stated that Petitioner was slow in learning the equipment and required supervision. On 16 September 1968, another service record entry was made, which stated that he kept his space up to standards, but needed routine supervision. On 16 March 1969,
 another service record entry was made, which stated that he needed reminding of his personal appearance and showed no initiative. On 16 September 1969, another service record entry was made, which stated that he needed close supervision, was sloppy in uniform and a very poor shipmate.
e.       Based on the information currently contained in the record, it appears that Petitioner’s commanding officer subsequently initiated administrative separation by reason of convenience of the government due to Petitioner having no promotion potential to petty officer. In connection with this processing, Petitioner would have acknowledged the separation action and been given an opportunity to submit a statement. Apparently, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation. On 15 October 1969, a service record entry was made, which stated that he was being transferred to the nearest separation activity for separation. At that time, his final overall trait and military behavior averages were 2.95 and 3.03, respectively. On 20 October 1969, five days later, the separation activity assigned a military behavior mark of 2.6, which lowered his final military behavior average to 2.95. Petitioner was separated on that same day under honorable conditions by reason of convenience of the government due to having no potential to be promoted to petty officer.

f.       In his application, Petitioner states that he was never given a copy of his performance evaluation marks nor had an opportunity to challenge the ratings.
g.       Regulations in effect at that time authorized assignment of evaluation marks upon discharge if 90 or more days of the current reporting period had elapsed. Regulations also determined characterization of service, in part, by overall trait and military behavior averages computed from marks assigned on a periodic basis. Averages of 2.7 in overall trait and 3.0 in military behavior were required for a fully honorable characterization of service.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants relief. Specifically, the Board finds that Petitioner’s discharge was processed according to regulations in effect at that time. However, the Board also finds that with the exception of the erroneous military behavior mark assigned by the separation activity, Petitioner’s final overall trait and military behavior mark averages met the requirements for a fully honorable characterization of service. The Board also notes that the Navy was well aware of Petitioner’s promotion potential to petty officer at the time of enlistment and found that he had no disciplinary infractions. Therefore, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s characterization of service should be changed to honorable.

RECOMMENDATION:
a.       That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that he was honorably discharged on 20 October 1969, vice the characterization of under honorable conditions actually issued on that date.
b.       That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.
c.       That upon request, the Veterans Administration be informed that Petitioner’s application was received by the Board on 26 April 2007.
4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.
         
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN        B RIAN J. GE OR GE
Recorder         A cting Recorder
5.       Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 7 23.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.




                                                              
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 01233-08

    Original file (01233-08.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 September 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07802-06

    Original file (07802-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SMWDocket No: 7802-06 26 January 2007From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, aformer enlisted member of the Navy Reserve, applied to this Boardrequesting an honorable characterization of service vice thecharacterization of under honorable conditions...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07086-02

    Original file (07086-02.PDF) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected to show a more favorable type of discharge than the undesirable discharge issued on 4 June 1958. f. On 13 May 1958, after Petitioner was advised of administrative separation action and waived her right to an administrative discharge board, recommended that she be separated with an undesirable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00697-01

    Original file (00697-01.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlistment member of the United States Navy, filed enclosure (a) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the naval record be corrected to show a more favorable discharge than the general discharge issued on 5 June 1973. He received a general discharge upon fulfillment of his service obligation on 5 June 1973. e. Regulations provide that individuals discharged by reason of expiration of enlistment will receive the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07171-00

    Original file (07171-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board also notes that even though Petitioner's trait averages differ on his enlisted performance record and his performance evaluation, both marks exceed the required average of 2.0 which is needed for a The Board further fully honorable characterization of service. notes Petitioner's only performance evaluation of record in which he was recommended for retention and promotion and believes that the sole reason for separation was due to him being nondeployable because he could not find...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10527-09

    Original file (10527-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting upgrading Petitioner’s OTH separation to an honorable discharge. Although the Board finds homosexual activities incompatible with naval service, it believes he deserves the type of discharge warranted by his service record. The Board particularly notes his honorable service in the Army, the fact that he had no disciplinary action in the Navy, and that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10306-06

    Original file (10306-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 20370-5100SJNDocket No: 10306-0630 May 2007From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OFRef: (a) 10 U.S.C. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.3. In reaching its conclusion, the majority concluded that even though the general discharge was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03552-09

    Original file (03552-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No: 03552-09 8 March 2010 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: NAVAL RECORD OF

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07580-06

    Original file (07580-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5109 CRS Docket No: 7580-06 4 February 2008 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: FOR}ER 4 | ; REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552 (b) SECNAVINST 1910.4B Encl: (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record (a), Petitioner 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference applied to this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected to...