DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 02742-09
29 December 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 teSel:
A eueee}-menbex panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records,.sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 9 December 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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 March 1981 after more
than five years prior honorable service. Based on the
information currently contained in your record it appears that
you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) on 28 January and on 4
February 1982. You remained on active duty until 27 March 1983
when you were discharged under honorable conditions based on your
conduct and proficiency marks at the expiration of your
enlistment,
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct and
proficiency averages computed from marks assigned on a periodic
basis. Your conduct average was 3.5. 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
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the two NUP's 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,
vru.W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10129-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of, Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 2009. 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 | 08034-08
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 | 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 | CY2008 | 05744-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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. Although your proficiency and conduct mark averages met the requirement for an honorable discharge, given your disciplinary actions, the Board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01897-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 2009. 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 | 00888-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Cor, ection of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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, After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient injustice. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04653-08
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, togethér with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 10 January 1966, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of unsuitability, and recommended a general...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04676-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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. 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 | 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.
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...