DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 11259-10
4 August 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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, gitting in executive session, considered your
application on 2 August 2011. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 on 21 August 1956 at age 17 and
served for two years and three months without disciplinary
incident. However, on 12 November and 8 December 1958 you
received nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for failure to obey a
lawful order and absence from your appointed place of duty.
During the period from 2 to 28 February 1959 you received NUP on
three more occasions for two specifications of disobedience,
contempt, and failure to obey a lawful order. You received your
fifth NOP on 29 December 1959 for absence from your appointed
place of duty.
On 2 and 24 March 1960 you received NUP for absence from your
appointed place of duty, drunk and disorderly conduct, and being
in possession of another Marine’s liberty card. Shortly
thereafter, on 12 April 1960, you were convicted by summary
court-martial (SCM) of absence from your appointed place of duty
and sentenced to hard labor for 21 days and reduction to paygrade
E-i. - ;
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of convenience of the government. The discharge
authority directed discharge under honorable conditions. At that
time you were not recommended for retention or reenlistment. On
19 August 1960, while serving in paygrade E-1, you were issued a
general discharge and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and
proficiency averages which are computed from marks assigned
during periodic evaluations. Your conduct average was 3.4. An
average of 4.0 in conduct was required at the time of your
separation for a fully honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to upgrade the characterization of your
general discharge. It also considered your assertions that you
only received two or three office hours for returning to the base
late, and that you were never convicted by court-martial.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your general
discharge because of your frequent misconduct which resulted in
eight NJPs and a SCM, and since your conduct average was
insufficiently high to warrant an honorable discharge. Finally,
the Board noted that Marines with an extensive record of
misconduct, such as yours, normally receive discharges under
other than honorable conditions, and as such concluded that you
were fortune to have received a general characterization of
service. Finally, there is documented evidence in the record
that is contrary to your assertion. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
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,
Loon
W. DEAN PF R
Executive rector
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 | CY2001 | 02060-00
On 3 January 1959 you received NJP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty. thereafter, on 27 February 1959, you were convicted by SCM of The punishment imposed was reduction to - absence from your appointed place of duty and were sentenced to hard labor for 35 days. concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your discharge given your frequent misconduct, which resulted in nine NJPs and two court-martial convictions, and since your conduct average was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06337-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 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 | CY2007 | 08155-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2008. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire to have your discharge upgraded to honorable. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03750-07
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. You were sentenced to confinement for 16 days. 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 | CY2007 | 08134-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 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 1 August 1962 you were issued a general discharge.
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 | 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 | CY2009 | 02411-09
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 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
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...