DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BIG
Docket No: 3738-13
26 February 2014
. 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 25 February 2014. 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 —
‘o£ 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 2 November.
1964. You received nonjudicial punishment on two occasions and
were convicted by a special court-martial. Your offenses
included destruction of government property, absence from
restricted muster, two periods of unauthorized absence totaling
26 days, and breaking restriction, You completed your active -
obligated ‘service and were transferred to the Navy Reserve with
a type warranted by service record characterization. On 2 May
1968, you received a general characterization of service, and
were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention)
reenlistment code.
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct marks
assigned on a periodic basis. Your conduct mark average was
2.7. A 3.0 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-current desire to upgrade your discharge. However,
the Board concluded that your discharge should not be changed ;
because of your misconduct and insufficiently high conduct mark
average. 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,
(PD a
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN ©
Acting Executive Director
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 | CY2014 | NR2049 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 October 2014. You are advised that no discharge is upgraded due merely to the passage of time or post service good conduct. 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 | CY2001 | 00226-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2001. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3032 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. You received a general discharge on 4 February 1974. 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 | NR6602 13
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 Reckabis Material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00907-09
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 your two SCM’s, conviction by SPCM, and failure to attain the required average in cohduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6090 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 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. A 3.0 conduct mark average was required for a fully honorable discharge.
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 | CY2013 | NR5883 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 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. 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 | CY2003 | 02060-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...