DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S$, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 6602-13.
24 July 2014
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 July 2014,' The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 Reckabis Material error or
injustice. :
You enligted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 29 November 1971. You served for nearly two years
without disciplinary incident, however, during the period from 5
October 1973 to 17 July 1975, you received nonjudicial punishment
{(NJP)‘‘on six occasions and were convicted by summary court-
martial (SCM). Your offenses were two specifications of
disobedience, failure to obey a lawful order, two specifications
of dereliction of duty, absence from your appointed piace of
duty, breaking restriction, wrongful possession of two Bolo
knives, cand wrongful POSBeS BLN: of marijuana . .
On 5° September: 1975, you were released from active duty under
‘honorable conditions and transferred to the Marine Corps Reserve.
On 28 November 1977, at the expiration of your enlistment, you
were discharged under honorable conditions . .
At ‘the time of your separation, character of service was based,
in part, on conduct and proficiency averages which were computed
from marks assigned during periodic evaluations. Your conduct
average was 3.8, however, an average of 4.0 in conduct was
required for a fully honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and post service conduct.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of your repetitive misconduct which resulted in six NUPs
‘and an SCM, and since your conduct average was insufficiently
high to warrant a fylly honorable characterization of service.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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,
Ree QD FER
ROBERT D. “ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2677-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 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 | 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 | CY2012 | 07189-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2013. 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 recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03700-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . A application on 31 January 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6063 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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, After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00344-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. On 17 duly 1975 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for a 26 day...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11044-06
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 on 18 Nay 1960 at age 18. You were sentenced to confinement at hard...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6690 13
AB three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 July 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 12 April 1983, your case was found to be sufficient in law and fact.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4121 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 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. Although your SPCM was dismissed, your NJP offense occurred in August 1977, making you ineligible for a Good Conduct Medal.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4905 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 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...