Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2049 14
Original file (NR2049 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 $. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

BIG
Docket No: 2049-14
15 October 2014

 

Dear aT

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 15 October 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 6 July 1970. You received nonjudicial punishment on
three occasions for shoplifting and two periods of unauthorized
absence (UA) totaling 28 days. You also had another period of
UA totaling 98 days for which no disciplinary action was taken.
You were then diagnosed with a character and behavior disorder
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
unsuitability. On 4 February 1972, you received a general
characterization of service due to unsuitability, 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
2.7. 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, post
‘service good conduct, and current desire to upgrade your
discharge. However, the Board concluded that your discharge
should not be changed because of your misconduct and
insufficiently 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 within one year from the date of the Board’s
decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by
the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 J. O’ NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3140-13

    Original file (NR3140-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | NR3862-13

    Original file (NR3862-13.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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given the seriousness...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03093-08

    Original file (03093-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2008. 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 11 September 1970, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed discharge by reason of unsuitability, and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2250-13

    Original file (NR2250-13.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 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. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of ‘unsuitability due to the diagnosed personality disorder.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR519 13

    Original file (NR519 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. 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 because of your lengthy...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8350 13

    Original file (NR8350 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2013 | NR7582 13

    Original file (NR7582 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 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 | CY2002 | 08479-01

    Original file (08479-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2002. 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. circumstances in your case the Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 07605-04

    Original file (07605-04.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.You enlisted in the Navy on 22 February 1985 at age 19. At the time of your service, a conduct...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00051-03

    Original file (00051-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2003. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a recharacterization of your service because of your repetitive periods of UA, which resulted in a court-martial conviction, and since your conduct average -was insufficiently high to warrant a fully characterization of service. Consequently, when applying for a...