EE ——— —E — I a Sea a EES
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490
BAN
Docket No: 05217-12
28 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 entered active duty in the Navy on 25 September 1986, and
served without disciplinary incident until 6 April 1989, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence
(UA) and missing ship’s movement. Shortly thereafter, you .
received the following disciplinary actions: on 20 December
1989, you were convicted at a summary court-martial of
destruction of non-governmental property; on 12 November 1991,
you received NUP for UA; and on 14 April 1992, you received NUP
for four specifications of UA and missing ship’s movement. You
were recommended for separation with an other than honorable
(OTH) discharge due to misconduct. You waived your rights to
consult with counsel and an administrative discharge board (ADB).
The separation authority approved the recommendation, and on 9
May 1992, you were separated with an OTH discharge due to
misconduct and an RE-4 (not recommended for retention)
reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your
characterization of service due to your frequent acts of
misconduct. Furthermore, the Board found you waived your right
to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention, or a better
characterization of service. 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,
oF ee Od . | Re ig petal
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12050 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00401-08
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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and waived the right to have your case heard...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03224-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00619-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 2010. 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 | CY2009 | 12619-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 2010. 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. Therefore, you were recommended for separation due to drug abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09989-09
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 June 2010. On 15 May 1989, you were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due ©o misconduct, You waived ali your procedural rights, including your right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR00271 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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. You were so discharged on 20 May 1992.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04345-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 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. 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 | CY2014 | NR1004 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2015. 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 Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09320-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. 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.