DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490
BAN
Docket No: 02321-12
25 March 2013
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 20 March 2013. 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 on 3 November 1980, and served without
disciplinary incident, until 21 February 1983, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence (UA) in
excess of 39 days. Shortly thereafter, you received another NUP
on 6 March 1984, for the illegal use of a controlled substance
(marijuana). On 12 March 1984, you were screened by a medical
health facility and deemed not to be drug dependent. You were
recommended for separation with an other than honorable (OTH)
discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse). You elected to consult
with counsel but waived your administrative discharge board
(ADB). Therefore, the separation authority approved the
recommendation and on 30 March 1984, you were separated with an
OTH discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse) and an RE-4
reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct and claim that you were severely
affected by the Beirut, Lebanon bombing in 1983 in which you lost
friends. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant a change to your characterization of
service, due to your misconduct. Furthermore, the Board found
that although you exercised your right to consult with counsel,
you waived your ADB, your best opportunity for retention, ora
better characterization of service. Regarding your claim that
you were present in Beirut during the barracks bombing, there is
no evidence in your record and you provided no such evidence, but
that you were only stationed aboard the USS IWO JIMA. In view of
the above, 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,
Tk DG
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03517-12
A.three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 February 2013. 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 | CY2011 | 00217-11
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 6 November 1984, you received the OTH discharge due to misconduct drug abuse (use). Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two NUP’s for misconduct, and drug abuse (use).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7118 13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 5. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2014. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08363-08
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. On 22 September, 5 October, and 10 October 1983, your urinalyses tested positive for marijuana. The Board noted that as a result of your prior periods of honorable service, you may be eligible for veterans' benefits.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1879-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 January 2014. 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 | 08887-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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 | CY2012 | 00541 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23. 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 drug abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR287 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2013. 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. Conseguently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04291-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2013. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to drug use. 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 oF injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00042-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TAL Docket No: 042-10 12 October 2010 ee. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 2010. @pnsequently, 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.