DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SIN
Docket No: 00444-12
7 November 2012
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 6 November 2012. 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.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
13 April 2005. The Board found that during the period from
24 August and 26 October 2006, you received three nonjudicial
punishments (NJP's) for four instances of failing to go to your
appointed place of duty, two instances of disrespect, and four
instances of disobedience. Subsequently, administrative
discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense. You elected to consult counsel
and have your case heard before an administrative discharge board
(ADB). On 14 December 2006 the ADB found that you had committed
misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and recommended
separation with a general discharge. On 18 December 2006, your
commanding officer concurred with the ADB's findings and
recommendation and directed that you receive a general discharge
by reason of misconduct. You were so discharged on 19 December
2006.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service and contentions that you believe your documentation was
falsified and that your discharge was unjust. Nevertheless, the
Board found that these factors and contentions were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your three NUP’s for serious offenses. The Board also noted that
you were fortunate to receive a general discharge since a
discharge other than honorable conditions is often directed when
an individual is discharged for misconduct. Concerning your
contentions, there is no evidence in the record to support them,
and you submitted no such evidence. Accordingly, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It 1s 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,
{of ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00488 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 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. On 30 May 1991 you were so discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03471-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 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 | CY2011 | 04469-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06487-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 April 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04561-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. reason of commission of a serious offense and recommended a general discharge but further recommended the separation be suspended for a period of 12 months. recommendation and directed your discharge by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00064-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 2002. that any problems with the ADB procedure or findings were remedied when the discharge authority directed a general discharge instead of the other than honorable discharge recommended by the ADB. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00110-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 September 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05057-06
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.You enlisted in the Navy on 1 October 1981 at age 17 with parental consent and served without incident...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05325 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 February 2012. You were so discharged on 6 February 1980. 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 | CY2013 | NR8683 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 2014. Nevertheless, the Board found that _ these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in four NJPs. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...