Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00322-11
Original file (00322-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 322-11.
17 October 2011

 

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 1552.

BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 12 October 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy and entered active duty on 5 December
1975. You received nonjudicial punishment on five occasions
and were convicted by a special court-martial, Your offenses
included unauthorized absence (four specifications totaling 44
days), disrespect (two specifications), wrongful possession and
use of marijuana, carrying a concealed weapon, absence from
your appointed place of duty (two specifications), failure to
obey a lawful order, resisting apprehension, breach of arrest,
and communicating a threat. On 15 July 1980, at. the end of
your active obligated active duty while serving in pay grade
E-2, you were released with a general characterization of
service based on your record, transferred to the Naval Reserve
and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention)
reenlistment code.

Characterization of service is based, in part, on trait marks
assigned on a periodic basis. Your overall trait mark average
was 2.92. A 3.0 overall trait mark average was required for a
fully honorable discharge.

In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
current desire to upgrade your discharge. However, the Board
concluded that your discharge should not be changed due to your
numerous acts of misconduct and insufficiently high overall
trait mark average. You are advised that no discharge is
automatically upgraded due merely to the passage of time or
post service good conduct. In view of the above, 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,

Lo Doon

W. DEAN P E

Executive Birector

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01332-11

    Original file (01332-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 November 2011. Characterization of service is based, in part, on trait marks assigned on a periodic basis. 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 | 11778-10

    Original file (11778-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 August 2011. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be changed due to your diagnosed personality disorder and insufficiently high overall trait mark average. 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 | 06695-08

    Original file (06695-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07918-10

    Original file (07918-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. 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 | 12014-10

    Original file (12014-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 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. Therefore, you were recommended for administrative separation with a general discharge due to unsuitability.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08999-10

    Original file (08999-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 April 2011. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be changed due to your low professional competence and insufficiently high overall trait average. 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 | CY2002 | 05636-00

    Original file (05636-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3140-13

    Original file (NR3140-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2014. On 14 July 1978 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed a general discharge by reason of unsuitability, and on 21 July 1978, you were so separated. -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 | CY2002 | 07893-02

    Original file (07893-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2003. 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. Subsequently, the discharge authority approved this recommendation your commanding officer was directed to issue you a general discharge by reason...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02609-10

    Original file (02609-10.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 January 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 an extensive record of misconduct, such as yours, normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and...