DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 10919-08
21 August 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.
_ BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 20 August 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 and medical records,
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. The Board found that you entered active
duty in the Navy on 19 December 1969. On 9 August 1970, you
had nonjudicial punishment for a 26 day period of unauthorized
absence (UA). On 14 June 1971, you were convicted by special
court-martial for five instances of UA totaling 67 days and
failure to go to your appointed place of duty. On
25 June 1971, you were recommended for administrative |
separation for the convenience of the government with the type
of discharge warranted by your service record. On 3 August
1971, you received a general discharge for the convenience of
the government, and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
Characterization of service is based in part on proficiency and
conduct marks which are assigned on a periodic basis. Your
proficiency and conduct mark averages were 2.0 and 3.2,
respectively. A 4.0 average in each category was required for
a fully honorable discharge.
The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully
weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth, remorse,
and post service good conduct. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
upgrading your general discharge because of your misconduct and
' insufficiently high proficiency and conduct mark averages. In
view of the above, 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 PF
Executive
ba
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04567-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 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. The Board also noted that as a result of your general characterization of service in the Marine Corps, you may be eligible for veterans' benefits.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07896-06
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 26 September 1969 at age 17. Your conduct average was 3.4. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02500-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ‘application on 12 January 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, - and policies. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given your two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10344-08
An average of 3.25 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for an 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, -honorable post military service, and desire to... upgrade your.discharge..- Nevertheless, the Board concluded these. for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02468-09
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. During the period from 7 August to 1 October 1969 you received three more NJPs for a two day period of unauthorized absence (UA), breaking restriction, and negligence due to failure to clean your rifle. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08435-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in your discharge given your record of three NUP’s, one...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01825-09
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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04412-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 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. Given the seriousness of your offenses that resulted in five disciplinary actions and your failure to attain the conduct mark average required...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12563 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 October 2012. 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. However, during the period from 11 July to 6 September 1973, you received three more NUPs for a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA),...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06912-08
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 22 December 1976, you received a general discharge based on your average conduct marks. 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.