DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BUG
Docket No: 564-12
18 October 2012
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 16 October 2012. 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
March 1971. You received nonjudicial punishment on four
occasions and were convicted by a summary court-martial. Your
offenses included assault, and unauthorized absence (five
periods totaling 44 days). On 4 May 1973, you completed your
two years of obligated active duty service, were discharged with
a general characterization of service, and were assigned an RE-4
(not recommended for retention) reenlistment code.
Character of service is based in part on conduct marks assigned
on a periodic basis. Your conduct mark average was 3.75. 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 and
current desire to upgrade your discharge. However, the Board
concluded that your discharge should not be changed because of
your numerous acts of misconduct and insufficiently high conduct
average. The Board believed you were fortunate to receive a
general characterization of service, because you could have been
administratively separated due to misconduct with an other than
discharge. 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,
a ae ~" 2 i=
- (~.3__e..
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
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 | CY2012 | 00432 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 October 2012. On 17 July 1969, you were discharged from the Naval Reserve with a general discharge. 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 | NR7561 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 conduct 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 | CY2011 | 12520 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2012. 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 | NR3738-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session; considered your ‘application on 25 February 2014. Characterization of service is based in part on conduct 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 | CY2013 | NR979 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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 LnjUSsL.Les.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01496 12
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. In accordance with the foregoing, on 17 November 1974, upon completion of your required active service, you received a general discharge under honorable conditions. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10390-09
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. Finally, the Board found that you were fortunate to have received a general discharge, because Marines normally receive a...
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 | CY2013 | NR871 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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.