DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX ‘
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 .
RDZ: ecb
Docket No. 02584-08
19 May 2009
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
“naval record pursuant to the provisions of titie 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 12 May 2009. 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 Navy on 17 Aprii 1984 for six years.
Unfortunately you only served a little over two years and seven
months when you were discharged due to frequent acts of .
misconduct. Specifically between your enlistment and discharge
you received five nonjudicial punishments. Your offenses were
bringing and consuming alcohol on a Navy vessel, possession of
drug paraphernalia, use of marijuana, assault, communication of
a threat, six periods of unauthorized absence totaling 14 days
and finally, larceny of $131.00 from one of your shipmates.
When you were informed that you were being recommended for an
other than honorable discharge you waived your right to an
administrative discharge where you would have been represented
by a military lawyer and could have requested retention or a
better discharge.
In its review of your application the Board concluded that in
view of your extensive disciplinary record as well as your
willingness to accept an other than honorabie discharge, your
characterization of service was both accurate and fair and
should not be changed now as a matter of clemency.
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,
SD D TPaadln
ROBERT D.“AZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02049-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 2009. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09266-08
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. For a fully honorable characterization of service at the time of your separation, you needed a 3.0 average in military behavior. 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 | CY2008 | 04611-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 2009. 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 | CY2009 | 06500-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2009. 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 | 09323-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2009. 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 | 08555-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 2009. 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. On 17 July 1985, you had NUP for another unspecified period of UA and were warned that further infractions could result in an other than honorable (OTH) discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10065-08
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. On 23 August 1984, you were notified of pending administrative separation action for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to a pattern of misconduct (frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities), and an RE-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11059-08
OR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your: application on 29 September 2009. 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 September 1975, the convening authority approved the sentence, but suspended tlw execution of the BCD for six months.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09890-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2009. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | CY2008 | 04581-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 2009. 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 were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your service due to the seriousness of...