DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
, 2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SUN
Docket No: 02411-09
7 January 2010
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 Roara for Correction of Naval’
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 5 January 2010. 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.
f
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"enTisted’in the Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 11 March 1959 at age 17. On 25 January 1960, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for reckless driving. On’
21 June 1960, you were convicted by summary court-martial of four
specifications of disobedience and a period of unauthorized
absence (UA). On 14 and 19 November 1960, you were convicted by
civil authorities of minor in possession of alcoholic beverages,
petty theft, and malicious mischief. On 25 January 1961, you
‘received a second NUP for a period of UA. On 30 March 1961, you
were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of 26 days of UA
and disobedience. During the period from 10 August 1961 to 27
March 1963, you received four additional NUP’s for disobedience,
failure to go to your appointed place of duty, leaving your place
of duty, and a period of UA. You remained on active duty until
19 April 1963, when you were released under honorable conditions
from active duty at the expiration of your enlistment and
transferred to the Marine Corps Reserve. On 11 June 1965 you
were discharged at the completion of your military obligation
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 3.7. At the time of your
service, a conduct average of 4.0 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 record
of service. 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.
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 ef 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11227-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3691 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. 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 recharacterization of your discharge given your seven NUP’s,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02609-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. 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 10 October 1962, you received NJP for UA from your unit.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07567-08
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 | CY2009 | 02417-09
“RK three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 2010. You were so discharged. 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 | 02008-08
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 | CY2008 | 04949-08
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, applied to this Board requesting an honorable characterization of service vice the general characterization of service that he received on 20 July 1964, when he was released from active duty. On 5 February 1963, he departed Quantico and at that time his proficiency and conduct mark averages were both 4.1. d. On 22 April 1963, Petitioner reported to Okinawa, Japan, for duty as a weapons...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00754-11
An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation 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 exiatence of probable material error or injustice. 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 | 11044-06
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 18 Nay 1960 at age 18. You were sentenced to confinement at hard...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00116-07
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 28 February 1959 at age 19. Nevertheless, the Board concluded...