DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SUN
Docket No: 04121-13
1 May 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 30 April 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 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 Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 3 November 1975. Your record is incomplete, however, on
17 March 1977, you were convicted by special court (SPCM) of 308
days of unauthorized absence (UA). You were sentenced to a
suspended period of confinement at hard labor, and a forfeiture
of pay. On 31 August 1977, you received nonjudicial punishment
(NJP) for wrongful possession of marijuana. On 16 July 1979, a
service record entry states, in part, that you were counseled
regarding your SPCM of 17 March 1977, being dismissed due to a
legal technicality, and warned that your career was still in
jeopardy and that immediate improvement in your conduct was
necessary. On 9 November 1979, you received another counseling
regarding your involvement with the wrongful use of marijuana.
You remained on active duty until you received a general
discharge on 6 September 1980.
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct marks
assigned on a periodic basis. Your conduct average was 3.5. At
the time of your service, a conduct average of 4.0 was required
for a fully honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service, medical issues, and desire to upgrade your discharge.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of
service given your NUP, involvement with illegal drugs, and
failure to attain the required average in conduct, or the
issuance of a Good Conduct Medal. In this regard, the medal
could only be issued to an individual on their first enlistment
with at least three years and nine months of continuous active
service, without any convictions by court-martial, NJP’s, or
civil convictions for offenses involving moral turpitude. If the
service record contained a record of NJP, a new period would
begin on the date following the offense. Although your SPCM was
dismissed, your NJP offense occurred in August 1977, making you
ineligible for a Good Conduct Medal. When you were released from
active duty, you were well short of the period of unblemished
service necessary to qualify for the award. With that being
said, the notation on your Certificate of Discharge or Release
from Active Duty (DD Form 214) does not show that you received a
Good Conduct Medal, but only sets forth the starting date for the
next period of the award, which appears to indicate further
misconduct. Accordingly, 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,
TD
ROBERT D. 4SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3840-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 12 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07199-98
A three-member panel of the Board.for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 1999. 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. The punishment imposed was restriction for 30 On 23 November 1977 you received NJP paygrade E-3 and Your record further reflects that during the period from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4632 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2014. The Board also noted that you were fortunate to have been retained on active duty to earn a better characterization of service after your second SPCM for a very lengthy period of UA. 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 | NR4078-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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. 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 | CY2008 | 09073-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, reguiations, and policies. On 17 August 1979, your case was forwarded and on 28 August 1979, the separation authority directed your separation by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4500 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. Five months later, on 11 July 1978, you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of UA totaling 78 days, and was sentenced to a $530 forfeiture of pay, reduction in pay grade, confinement for two months and a suspended bad conduct discharge (BCD). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
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 | CY2007 | 09066-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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 | CY2014 | NR04500 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8164 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 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...