DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TJIR
Docket No: 741-12
25 October 2012
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 23 October 2012. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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
Br] uUstice..
You enlisted in the Navy on 1 August 1980 at age 19 and served
for nearly a year without disciplinary incident, but on 31 July
1981 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of two
periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling two days, two
specifications of disrespect, and two specifications of failure
to obey a lawful order. On 9 October and again on 11 November
1981, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for three periods
of absence from your appointed place of duty and a one day period
of UA.
During the period from 6 January to 17 February 1982 you
received NUP on three more occasions for two specifications of
attempted escape, theft, wrongful possession and use of an
identification card with the intent to deceive, three periods of
absence from your appointed place of duty, and two specifications
of failure to obey a lawful order.
On 21 February 1982 you were notified of pending administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of
a discreditable nature with military authorities. At that time
you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to
present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
However, you submitted a written rebuttal concerning the
characterization of the discharge and the discharge itself.
Nonetheless, on 30 March 1982, your commanding officer
recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities. On 14 April 1982
the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed
separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct and on 23 April 1982 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, desire to upgrade your discharge, and the passage of
time. 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 NJPs and an SCM. Further, you were given an
opportunity to defend your actions, but waived your procedural
right to present your case to an ADB. Finally, no discharge is
automatically upgraded due solely to the passage of time.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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,
TW es Q> hao
ROBERT D.™“2ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04699-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 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. The record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this 76 day period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03316-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 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. On 15 September 1982 the discharge authority approved these recommendations and directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11286-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. After waiving your procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer recommended separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08424-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 June 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. 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 | 12523 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03814-07
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. On 3 January 1982 the discharge authority directed discharge under honorable conditions by reason of drug abuse. 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 | CY2010 | 06717-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. 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 | 03250-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 January 2012. 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 | CY2007 | 02971-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 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. As a result, on 30 September 1982, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to hold your separation in abeyance pending...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04498-09
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 12 September 1980, you received NUP for 16 periods of failure to go to your appointed place of duty and a 20 day period of UA. 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...