DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN |
Docket No: 3496-09 _
20 January 2010
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 13 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.
after careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence gubmitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice. :
You enlisted in the Navy on 17 December 1980, and served without
disciplinary incident until 19 June 1981, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for five specifications of
unauthorized absence (UA).
Shortly thereafter, you received the following NUP’s: on 17
December 1981, for failure to obey a lawful order by using an
illegal substance (marijuana); and on 24 January 1983, for
failure to obey a lawful order by improperly standing a watch.
You were recommended for administrative separation due to
misconduct. The separation authority approved the recommendation
and on 7 March 1983, you were separated for misconduct with a
general discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code.
Characterization of service is based, in part, on trait marks
assigned on a periodic basis. Your overall trait average was
2.73. An overall trait average of 3.0 was required for a fully
honorable discharge.
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 insufficiently high trait mark
average. Finally, the Board believed that considerable clemency
was extended to you when you received a general discharge.
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06776-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. Finally, Marines with a record of misconduct normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and as such, the Board noted that you were fortunate to receive a general 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06776-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. Finally, Marines with a record of misconduct normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and as such, the Board noted that you were fortunate to receive a general 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12366-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05539-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Nava! Records, Sitting im executive session, considered youn application on 23 January 2008 Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of together with all material submitted in support and applicable statutes, regulations, Board. Nevertheless, the Board found that these...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00226-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2001. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03152-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 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 | CY2007 | 08780-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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 | CY1999 | 07288-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 June 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail 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 | CY2009 | 07288-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 June 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail 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 | CY2007 | 10872-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 2008. Characterization of service is determined by a service member's conduct, actions, performance and marks assigned on a periodic basis. Given your NUP's and failure to attain the behavior mark average required for a fully honorable characterization of service, the Board found that your period of active service warranted a general characterization of service.