DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMS
Docket No: 4617-08
12 February 2009
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 11 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, 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.
On 27 July 1976, you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with
parental consent. On 31 January 1977, you received a
performance evaluation which stated that your performance was
below average, you wandered away from your work area, and were
argumentative and resentful. On 28 March and 21 April 1977,
you had nonjudicial punishment. Your offenses included two
instances of absence from your appointed place of duty, seven
instances of disobedience of a lawful order, five instances of
failure to go to your appointed place of duty, two instances of
disrespect, use of provoking speech, and communicating a
threat. On 5 May 1977, you received a performance evaluation
which stated that you disregarded and were disrespectful of
authority, and unfit for the naval service.
On 5 May 1977, your commanding officer initiated administrative
separation by reason of convenience of the government due to
substandard performance of duty and inability to adapt. In
connection with this processing, you acknowledged the
separation action and that characterization of service would be
determined as warranted by your service record. You also
submitted a statement requesting retention. On 20 May 1977,
the separation authority approved the recommendation and
directed discharge by reason of convenience of the government
due to substandard performance of duty and inability to adapt,
and that your characterization of service would be determined
as warranted by your service record. On 9 June 1967, you were
separated with a general discharge by reason of convenience of
the government due to substandard performance of duty and
inability to adapt.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth
and desire for an honorable discharge. Nevertheless, the Board
found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your service. In this regard,
characterization of service for members who are discharged by
reason of convenience of the government is determined by their
conduct, actions, and overall trait and behavior marks assigned
on a periodic basis. Minimum acceptable overall trait and
behavior marks of 2.7 and 3.0, respectively, were required to
form the basis for a fully honorable characterization of
service. Your overall trait and behavior mark averages were
2.02 and 1.9, respectively. Given your misconduct and failure
to attain the overall trait and behavior mark averages required
for a fully honorable characterization of discharge, the Board
found that your service warranted a general characterization of
discharge. 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.
The Board noted that as a result of your general
characterization of service, you may be eligible for veterans'
benefits. You should contact the nearest office of the
Department of Veterans Affairs if you desire clarification
about your eligibility for those benefits.
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,
VO ak SS Ar nen
ROBERT D. SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Feb 01 13_04_27 CST 2001
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Feb 01 11_59_57 CST 2001
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08750-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 June 2002. 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 the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00159-99
in your record. Regulations required the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals discharged command due to substandard performance or by reason of inability to adapt to military service." The Board noted that you have applied for the Navy The Board also noted that the commanding and that your contention that You contend that you NJPs in only 16 months of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06297-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 February 2001. The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and contention were insufficient to warrant recharacteri- zation of your discharge given your record of three NJPs and special court-martial conviction, and your failure to achieve the required averages in military behavior and overall traits. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00352-01
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 April 2001. 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 Naval Discharge Review Board denied the Board carefully weighed The Board concluded that the and the fact that it been more than Counsel contends that while it...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00014-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2009. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07893-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 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. Subsequently, the discharge authority approved this recommendation your commanding officer was directed to issue you a general discharge by reason...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03912-06
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 Naval Reserve on 13 January 1982 at age 19. The punishment imposed was a $200...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00100-03
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. On 23 Plpril 1981 you were referred for a psychiatric evaluation because of your suicidal fantasy. 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.