DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 2486-11
1 December 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 22 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 Marine Corps and entered active duty on 2
December 1969. You received nonjudicial punishment on five
occasions and were convicted by a summary court-martial. Your
offenses included two periods of unauthorized absence totaling
eight days, violating a lawful order, being incapacitated for
the performance of your duties, and failure to be at your
appointed place of duty (two specifications). You were then
notified that you were being administratively separated due to
unsuitability with a type warranted by your service record
characterization of service. On 12 November 1971, you received
a general discharge due to unsuitability.
Character of service is based, in part, on conduct marks
assigned on a periodic basis. Your conduct mark average was
3.6. A 4.0 conduct 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, Vietnam
service, and allegation that you were innocent. However, the
Board concluded that your discharge should not be changed
because of your misconduct and insufficiently high conduct mark
average. The Board noted that you were fortunate to receive a
general discharge, since individuals who have committed
misconduct such as yours normally receive an other than
honorable characterization of service. The Board found no
evidence in your record to support your allegation, and you
have provided no such evidence. You are advised that no
discharge is 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,
W. DEAN PF R
Executive ector
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01149-11
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 | CY2011 | 01332-11
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 | 07609-10
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 | CY2013 | NR3862-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2014. 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 found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given the seriousness...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00548-07
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.You enlisted in the Navy on 9 March 1973 at age 18. Subsequently, the discharge authority directed...
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 | CY2013 | NR963 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. A 3.0 conduct mark average 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 | CY2007 | 07407-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 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 | CY2013 | NR3140-13
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 | CY2010 | 12014-10
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.