DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SIN
Docket No: 00888-08
5 February 2009
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10 of the United
States Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Cor, ection of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 3 February 2009. 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,
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
2 November 1979 at age 18. On 7 February 1981, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for a brief period of unauthorized
absence. You received a forfeiture of pay and restriction.
On 13 April 1981, you were processed for separation by reason of
convenience of the government due to creating an administrative
burden to your command. You elected not to make a statement, and
did not object to the separation. On 17 April 1981, your
commanding officer directed your separation, stating in part,
that on several occasions you displayed a lack of control in a
working environment, that if disturbed by others, you reacted
violently with little warning, and that a psychiatric evaluation
was conducted because of your violent tendencies. Further, that
in all phases of your assigned duties, you had been totally
unreliable, unpredictable, and maintained the same belligerent
attitude. Therefore, you received a general discharge based on
your conduct and proficiency marks.
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct and
proficiency averages computed from marks assigned on a periodic
basis. Your conduct average was 2.9. At the time of your
service, a conduct average of 3.0 was required for a fully
honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant upgrading your
discharge given the NUP and your failure to attain the required
average in conduct. 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 PFE
Executive Dir
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04072-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. In this regard, characterization of service for members who are discharged by reason of convenience of the government is determined by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02742-09
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 average of 4.0 was required 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 | CY2008 | 06873-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. On 15 January 1983, the discharge authority directed a type warranted by service record discharge due to your alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07929-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. 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 | CY2005 | 09433-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 May 2006. 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 | CY2001 | 03209-01
you were told that after six months, your discharge would be The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and upgraded. contention were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of three of service, and the fact that you failed to achieve the required average in conduct. 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 | CY2006 | 07935-06
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 9 December 1980 at age 17. Your conduct average was 3.2. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02287-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2001. 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 were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of misconduct which...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05576-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 2011. 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 | CY1999 | 02209-99
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...