Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6733 13
Original file (NR6733 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

704 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

TAL
Docket No: 6733-13
24 July 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 9 July 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 Navy and began a period of active duty on

9 June 1966 at age 17. You received nonjudicial punishment
(NJP) on five occasions for two instances of discreditable
conduct, possession of another Sailor's Armed Forces
identification card, two instances of failure to obey a written
regulation, two instances of insubordinate conduct toward a
noncommissioned officer, disrespect toward a superior
commissioned officer and failure to go to your appointed place
of duty. On 31 October 1969 you were released from active duty
in compliance with an Early Release Program. You were
discharged under honorable conditions based on your conduct mark
average.
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct marks
assigned on a periodic basis. Your conduct mark average was
2.5. At the time of your service, a conduct mark average of 3.0
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 and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant upgrading your
discharge given your misconduct that resulted in five NJPs and
failure to attain the required average in conduct. Concerning
your alleged alcohol problems, there is no indication in the
record that such: problems, if they existed at the time of your
service, were so serious as to excuse you of responsibility for

“your actions or were sufficiently mitigating to warrant

recharacterization. Finally, there is no provision of law or in
Navy regulations that allows for recharacterization of service
due solely to the passage of time. 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,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3840-13

    Original file (NR3840-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 07446-10

    Original file (07446-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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. 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 | CY2010 | 11955-10

    Original file (11955-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. 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 | NR3409-13

    Original file (NR3409-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    — _A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 February 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 | NR3860-13

    Original file (NR3860-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval _ Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ; application on 19 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 | CY2010 | 05234-09

    Original file (05234-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2010. 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 | NR2804 14

    Original file (NR2804 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three- -member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 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 | 07277-10

    Original file (07277-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 2011. The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and overall record 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 | CY2007 | 00426-07

    Original file (00426-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.On 13 May 1958 you enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve at age 22 after a prior period of honorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6090 13

    Original file (NR6090 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.