DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMW
Docket No: 7486-07
15 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-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 14 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
On 13 August 1976, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19.
On 15 March 1978, you began an unauthorized absence (UA) that
ended on 15 November 1978, a period of about 245 days. On
20 February 1979, you were convicted by a special court-martial
of the 245 day period of UA. The sentence included forfeitures
of pay, reduction in rank, and confinement at hard labor (CHL).
On 26 March 1979, you were released from CHL and given orders
to report to your command. However, on 20 April 1979, you
failed to report and began another UA that ended on
10 March 1980, a period of about 324 days. On 16 April 1980,
you were counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance
and conduct and warned that further infractions could result in
disciplinary action or an other than honorable (OTH) discharge.
On 16 May 1980, you were convicted by a summary court-martial
(SCM) of the 324 day period of UA. On 2 June 1980, you began
another UA that ended on 10 June 1980, a period of about eight
days. On 25 June 1980, you were convicted by another SCM of
the eight day period of UA.
On 3 July 1980, your commanding officer initiated
administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to
frequent discreditable involvement. In connection with this
processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an
OTH discharge and waived the right to have your case heard by
an administrative discharge board (ADB). The separation
authority subsequently approved the discharge recommendation
and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to
frequent discreditable involvement. On 25 July 1980, you were
so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth
and remorse for your misconduct. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
included more than 19 months of total UA and continued after you
were warned that further infractions could result in an OTH
discharge. Finally, the Board noted that you waived the right
to have your case heard by an ADB, your best opportunity for
retention or a more favorable characterization of service.
Therefore, the Board concluded that the 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06405-06
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.On 7 July 1978 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18, and on 31 October 1978 you received nonjudicial...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01905-07
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.On 9 July 1976, you enlisted in the Navy at age 20. On 1 May 1979, in connection with the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09667-06
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.On 27 August 1979 you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17 with parental consent. On 18 August 1981...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 10041 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 July 2012. 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 | CY2008 | 06162-08
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. During the period 4 April to 10 August 1978, you were in a UA status, a period of about 128 days. On 15 August 1979, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent discreditable involvement.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02982-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 5 January 2010. On 26 March 1980, you were notified that administrative separation action. 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 | CY2009 | 02619-09
On 3 July 1980, you received NUP for assault and breach of the peace. On 30 July 1980, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement. 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 | CY2006 | 08897-06
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.On 25 November 1977 you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with parental consent. In connection with this...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00475-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2007. 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 | CY2008 | 00598-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 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...