Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11227-07
Original file (11227-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TIR
Docket No: 11227-07
14 November 2008

 

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 13 November 2008. 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 on 5 January 1959 at age 17 and
served without disciplinary incident until 18 August 1960, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for absence from your
appointed place of duty. About five months later, on 4 January
1961, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a 21
day period of unauthorized absence (UA), and on 9 October 1961
you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a six day
period of UA and absence from your appointed place of duty. You
were also convicted by SPCM on 17 May 1962 of a 24 day period of
UA and absence from your appointed place of duty.

On 25 July 1963 you were convicted by SCM of a four day period of
UA and sentenced to hard labor for 45 days, restriction for two
months, reduction to paygrade E-1, and a $70 forfeiture of pay,
which was suspended for six months. Shortly thereafter, on 29
July 1963, you were notified of pending administrative separation
action by reason of unsuitability. At that time you waived your
procedural rights and did not object to the discharge. Your
commanding officer recommended discharge under honorable
conditions by reason of unsuitability due to repetitive
disciplinary infractions. On 22 August 1963 the discharge
authority approved this recommendation and directed discharge
under honorable conditions. On 30 August 1963 you were issued 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 3.0. An average
of 4.0 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 assertion that your discharge should be upgraded
because your conduct and proficiency marks warranted an honorable
characterization of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of your repetitive misconduct, which
resulted in NJP and four court-martial convictions, and since
your conduct average was insufficiently high to warrant an
honorable discharge. Finally, there is documented evidence in
the record that is contrary to your assertion. 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,

Wea’

W. DEAN PF F
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11044-06

    Original file (11044-06.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 Marine Corps on 18 Nay 1960 at age 18. You were sentenced to confinement at hard...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07567-08

    Original file (07567-08.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 June 2009. Furthermore, disciplinary action and an administrative separation are appropriate for alcohol related offenses. 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 | 02013-08

    Original file (02013-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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. 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 | 02056-08

    Original file (02056-08.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 January 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. 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 | CY2007 | 07927-07

    Original file (07927-07.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 Marine Corps on 3 April 1961 at age 17. On 10 February 1965 an ADB recommended an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02411-09

    Original file (02411-09.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 the six NJP’s, conviction by SCM and SPCM, two civil convictions, and your failure to attain the required average in conduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08479-01

    Original file (08479-01.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 May 2002. 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. circumstances in your case the Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02838-07

    Original file (02838-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TJIR Docket No: 2838-07 24 January 2008 A three-member panel of the Boa Records, sitting in executive session, application on 23 January 2008. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative rd for Correction of Naval considered your Your allegations of error and regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Subsequently, you were notified of pending...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02008-08

    Original file (02008-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 13 April 1962 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of absence from your appointed place of duty and sentenced to hard labor for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08134-07

    Original file (08134-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 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 1 August 1962 you were issued a general discharge.