Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03798-10
Original file (03798-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 03798-10
20 January 2011

 

 

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.

BA three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 20 January 2011. 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 and began a period of active
duty on 10 April 1970. Between 31 July 1970 and 24 March 1972,

you received three nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s). Your
offenses consisted of: failure to go to an appointed place of
duty, and two incidents of failure to obey a lawful order. You

were informed that you would receive a type warranted by service
record discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code since you were not
eligible for reenlistment. The discharge authority directed a
general discharge. You were so discharged on 31 March 1972.

 

Character of service is based in part on conduct marks assigned

on a periodic basis. You conduct mark average was 3.9. A 4.0
conduct mark average 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. However, the Board found that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant any change in your character of service,
given your record of three NUJP's for misconduct and
insufficiently high conduct mark average. The Board also noted
that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge since a
separation under other than honorable conditions is often
directed when an individual is found to have committed
misconduct. 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,

W. DEAN P
Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07609-10

    Original file (07609-10.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. An average of 4.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service. Further, Marines with an extensive record of misconduct, such as yours, normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and as such the Board noted...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 07663-03

    Original file (07663-03.rtf) 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.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 iniusti cc. On 24 June 1972 the discharge authority directed a general discharge by reason of unsuitability due...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03701-09

    Original file (03701-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 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 | CY2008 | 10761-08

    Original file (10761-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 20 August 2009. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. On 1 September 1972 and 1 March 1973, _ you received an adverse mark in military behavior.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01149-11

    Original file (01149-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 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 | CY2010 | 10975-10

    Original file (10975-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 July 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. Finally, Sailors with a record of misconduct and substandard performance, such as yours, normally receive discharges under other than honorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 04695-98

    Original file (04695-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 1999. The record further reflects two periods of UA from 2-10 June and 22-23 June 1971, for which no disciplinary action is shown in the record. 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 | 00043-06

    Original file (00043-06.rtf) 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.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 13 October 1969 at age 18. Subsequently, you were issued a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2049 14

    Original file (NR2049 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 October 2014. You are advised that no discharge is upgraded due merely to the passage of time or post service good 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 | CY2010 | 07973-10

    Original file (07973-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 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. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in your character of service, given your record of one NUP...