DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 6479-07
13 May 2008
A three-member 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.
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 26 September 1980 at age 17 and
served without disciplinary incident until 6 October 1982, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for dereliction of
duty.
During the period from 21 January to 23 November 1983 you
received NJP on four more occasions for three specifications of
sleeping on post, disobedience, being out of uniform, two
specifications of breaking restriction, and dereliction of duty.
On 19 December 1983 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct. At that time you waived your right to consult with
legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 22 December 198 your commanding
officer recommended separation under honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. However, on
21 January 1984 the discharge authority directed discharge under
other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to
frequent involvement with military authorities, and on 9 January
1984 you were so separated.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, desire to have your discharge upgraded to honorable,
and the passage of time. It also considered your assertion that
you chose not to complete your enlistment and agreed to be
discharged. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of .your discharge
because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct which
resulted in five NUJPs. Further, there is sufficient evidence in
the record that is contrary to your assertion. Finally, you were
given an opportunity to defend yourself, but waived your
procedural right to present your case to an ADB and perhaps
obtain a better characterization of service. 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02811-07
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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, period of service without disciplinary incident, time served in Beirut, post service conduct, and the passage of time. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02760-07
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 4 October 1983 at age 19 and served for nearly a year without disciplinary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07047-07
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 19 January 1981 at age 18. The punishment imposed was extra duty and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01666-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulatjo~ 5 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 5 October 1979 at age 18, and subsequently extended your enlistment for 12...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02177-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 October 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 10 May 1985, you were so discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01971-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 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. 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 | CY2010 | 04509-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2010. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11198-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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 26 February 1992 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03030-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 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. After waiving your procedural rights to legal counsel and an administrative discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer recommended discharge...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10123-07
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 that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct that continued after you were repeatedly warned that further infractions could result in an OTH discharge. ...