DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 1332-11
3 November 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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 1 November 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 30 January
1976. You were convicted by a summary court-martial of a 34
day period of unauthorized absence. You were then
administratively processed for separation due to unsuitability.
On 17 September 1976, you were discharged with a general
characterization of service based on your military record, 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 2.2. 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, current
desire to upgrade your discharge, and post service good
conduct. However, the Board concluded that your discharge
should not be changed due to your 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,
Ls
Wo
Executive xr or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10952-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 July 2011. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be changed due to your short period of service 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 | CY2010 | 11778-10
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 | CY2010 | 08999-10
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 | CY2011 | 00322-11
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 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 | CY2008 | 02635-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. On 29 December 1972, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7582 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2014. 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 | CY2014 | NR10256 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 2014. service, since Sailors who have committed misconduct normally receive other than honorable discharges. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official haval record, the burden is on,the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00417-07
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.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.On 25 March 1970 you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with parental consent and served without incident...
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 | CY2007 | 01931-07
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.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.On 7 August 1974, you enlisted in the Navy Reserve at age 19 and began a period of active service. ...