DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BJG
Docket No: 7561-13
i2 August 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 12 August 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 Marine Corps and entered a period of active
duty on 4 May 1982. You received nonjudicial punishment on
three occasions for two periods of unauthorized absence totaling
eight days, writing an insufficient funds check, and failure to
obey a lawful order. You were then diagnosed with aquaphobia
which interfered with the performance of your duties. You were
recommended for administrative separation with a type warranted
by your service record characterization of service due to a
condition, not a disability (aquaphobia). On 20 December 1985,
you received a general characterization of service due to a
condition, not a disability (aquaphobia), and were assigned a
waivable RE-3P (condition, not a disability) reenlistment code.
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct marks
assigned on a periodic basis. Your conduct mark average was
3.8. A conduct mark average of 4.0 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 and
current desire to upgrade your discharge. However, the Board
¥concluded that your &ischarge should not be changed because of
ayour misconduct and iffsufificiently 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,
(ta SSS at
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7582 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2014. 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2014 | NR2804 14
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 | CY2013 | NR983 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2013. 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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR6733 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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. 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 | 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 | 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 | 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.