DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
					2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

						 TRG
	Docket No: 6769-07
 	19 May 2008

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-memj3er panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 2008. 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 on 17 January 1975 at age 19. On 30 January and 19 August 1975 you received nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence of about five days and two instances of disobedience.

On 30 April 1976 a physical evaluation board found that you had a chronic and severe anxiety neurosis which was rated at 50% disabling and recommended that you be retired by reason of physical disability. You were retired effective on 1 June 1976 at that time your service was characterized as a general discharge under honorable conditions.

Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and proficiency averages, which are computed from marks assigned during periodic evaluations. Your conduct mark average was 3.8. A minimum average mark of 4.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation 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, limited education and desire for a better characterization of service. The Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterjzatjon of your discharge given your disciplinary record and failure to achieve the required average mark in conduct. The Board concluded that the general discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

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

2