DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD F O R C O R R E C T l O N O F N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
CRS
Docket No: 10468-02
8 January 2003
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 7 January 2003. 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.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 22
September 1982. You reported to active duty on 4 April 1983.
The record reflects that you received four nonjudicial
punishments. The offenses included an unauthorized absence of
four days, dereliction of duty, stealing four photographic
slides, violation of a lawful general regulation, and breaking
restriction on four occasions.
On 10 January 1985 the commanding officer recommended that you be
separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. When informed of the
recommendation, you elected to waive the right to present your
case to an administrative discharge board. After review by the
discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was
approved and on 30 January 1985 you received an other than
honorable discharge.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
immaturity. However, the Board concluded that these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge,
given your four disciplinary actions within a period of less than
three years. Therefore, the Board concluded that no change to
the discharge 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01323-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 2003. However, on 3 October 1985 you were dropped from this counseling due to your non-amenability to treatment. 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 | CY2001 | 07253-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2002. However, on 18 January 1985, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to administratively reprocess you for separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and commission of a serious offense, and to afford you the right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 4 March 1985 an ADB recommended you be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06278-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 July 2003. The letter of 27 March 1986 that notified you that the request was denied stated that your "statements clearly demonstrate that your request for discharge (was) based on dissatisfaction with the naval service and not by reason of conscientious objector beliefs." Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09807-02
Documentary material considered by the Bocird consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was modified and on 11 January 1973 you received a general discharge by reason of unfitness due to substandard personal behavior. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02675-03
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. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 8 August 1983 you received an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10956-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2003. 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. However, on 18 December 1986, this suspended sentence was vacated due to your continued misconduct, specifically, a four day period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09384-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2003. You received NJP on 22 February 1992 for a 17 period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 4 5 days and a $550 forfeiture of pay. However, the record does not reflect that any disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10608-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 2003. The Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your theft of pills and other misconduct. 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 | 05617-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2003. 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. Since you were deemed to be financially irresponsible, the Board concluded that there is no error or injustice in your reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03271-03
After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 13 October 1995 you were discharged with an other than honorable discharge. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your use of drugs. 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.