Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01825-09
Original file (01825-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

‘BAN
Docket No: 1825-09
17 November 2009

 

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 12 November 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.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 1 March 1969, and served
without disciplinary incident until 10 October 1969, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence
(UA) in excess of 27 days.

Shortly thereafter, you received the following NUP’s: on 5
December 1969, for UA; and on 29 December 1969, for UA.
Therefore, you were recommended for separation with a general
discharge due to the convenience of the government and your claim
to be a conscientious objector. The separation authority
approved the recommendation and on 23 March 1970, you were
separated with a general discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code.

Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and
proficiency marks assigned on a periodic basis. An average of
4.0 in conduct was required for a fully honorable
characterization of service. Your conduct average was 3.6.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of your misconduct and conduct average of 3.6.
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,

Mo Noa b.
W. DEAN PF F
Rxecutive Dive

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07585-10

    Original file (07585-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 May 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 polic.es.. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09527-08

    Original file (09527-08.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. 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 or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02797-02

    Original file (02797-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2002. 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. your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02468-09

    Original file (02468-09.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. 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 | CY2009 | 12867-09

    Original file (12867-09.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. On 24 September 1994, you were reieased under honorable conditions from active duty at the expiration of your enlistment and transferred to the Navy Reserve. At the time of your service, a conduct average of 4.0 was required for a fully honorable characterization of service.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08508-07

    Original file (08508-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 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. 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 | 08034-08

    Original file (08034-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 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. About six months later, on 30 December 1966 you received NUP for a four day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and disorderly conduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09683-07

    Original file (09683-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    .A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2008. Characterization of service is based in part on conduct and proficiency averages computed from marks assigned on a periodic basis. 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 | CY2011 | 02486-11

    Original file (02486-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 November 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 | 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.