DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 26370-5100
SON
Docket No: 07797-09
a7 May 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 21552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 21 May 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 submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
‘You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
24 July 1973. The Board found that you received nonjudicial
punishment (NIP) for a brief period of unauthorized absence.
You remained on active duty until 7 July 1976 when you were
released under honorable conditions at the expiration of your
enlistment and transferred to the Navy Reserve. At that time,
you were not recommended for retention. On 27 July 1979, you
received a general discharge at the completion of your military’
obligation based on your conduct and proficiency marks.
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct averages
computed from marks assigned on a periodic basis. Your conduct
average was 2.8. At the time of your service, a conduct average
of 3.0 was required for a fully shonorable 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 upgrading your
discharge given your NUP and 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,
\aWouke
~ 3
W. DEAN DFE
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04927-09
A three-member, panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 2010. At the time of your service, a conduct average of 3.0 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 04343-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 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 | CY2009 | 04563-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 2010. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant upgrading your discharge given the SCM and failure to attain the required average in conduct. 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 | 02429-09
A three-member panel of the Board 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04140-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2009 | 09684-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 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 | CY2009 | 09566-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 July 2010. The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade E-2. 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 | 13394-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 2010. 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 | 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...