Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR871 13
Original file (NR871 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

BUG
Docket No: 871-13
15 October 2013

 

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 10 October 2013. 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 1 December
1955. You received nonjudicial punishment on eight occasions
for underage drinking, failure to obey a lawful regulation (two
instances), five periods of unauthorized absence totaling 24
days, assault, wrongful appropriation, and missing the movement
of your ship. You were then administratively processed for
separation due to inaptitude with a type warranted by service
record characterization of service. On 23 August 1957, you were
released from active duty with a general characterization of
service due to inaptitude, and transferred to the Naval Reserve.

Character of service is based in part on conduct marks assigned
on a periodic basis. Your conduct mark average was 2.66. A 3.0
conduct mark average was required for a fully honorable
characterization of service.

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 discharge
should not be changed due to your numerous acts of misconduct
and insufficiently high conduct mark average. The Board
believed you were fortunate to receive a general
characterization of service, since Sailors who have committed
misconduct such as yours normally receive other than honorable
discharges. You are advised that no discharge is automatically
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,

\a.

W DEAN PFEDFF
Executive Dira¢ctdr

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR983 13

    Original file (NR983 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 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 | NR963 13

    Original file (NR963 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 16 October 2013. A 3.0 conduct mark average 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 | NR8882 13

    Original file (NR8882 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 30 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. Additionally, at the time of your service, a general discharge was routinely issued to service members discharged due to inaptitude.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR979 13

    Original file (NR979 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 22 October 2013. A 3.0 conduct mark average 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 LnjUSsL.Les.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07918-10

    Original file (07918-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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 | CY1999 | 07199-98

    Original file (07199-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2011 | 01086-11

    Original file (01086-11.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 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. 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 | CY2011 | 01149-11

    Original file (01149-11.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 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. 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

    Original file (NR10256 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 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 | CY2011 | 01332-11

    Original file (01332-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 November 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.