DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BJG
Docket No: 4692-13
8 April 2014
i
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 8 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 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 21 August
1978. You received nonjudicial punishment on three occasions
and were convicted by a summary court-martial and civil
authorities. Your offenses included destruction of government
property, wrongful possession of marijuana, dereliction of duty,
resisting arrest, sleeping on watch, assault, disrespect, petit
larceny, concealing evidence, and possession of false
identification. On 17 August 1982, you completed your active
duty obligated service, were transferred to the Navy Reserve
with a general characterization of service, and assigned an RE-4
(not recommended for retention) reenlistment code. On 8
February 1984, you were discharged from the Navy Reserve with a
general characterization of service, and not recommended for
reenlistment.
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct marks
assigned on a periodic basis. Your conduct mark average was
2.8. 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, post
service good conduct, and current desire to upgrade your
discharge. However, the Board concluded that your general
characterization of service should not be changed in light of
your misconduct, non-recommendation for retention, and failure
to attain the required conduct mark average. 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,
seen Gone
ROBERT D. 4SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4927 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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. On 18 January 1980, you received the general discharge (unsuitability-personality disorder), and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR5397 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2014. At the time of your service, a conduct average of 3.00 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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR8932 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11259-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 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. An average of 4.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02969-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. nonjudicial punishments were more than sufficient to support the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8350 13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 §. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and claim that you were told that in six months your Docket No.NRO8350-13 discharge would be automatically upgraded to a honorable characterization of service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04374-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . At the time of your service, a conduct average of 3.0 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.