DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
‘Docket No: 2728-13
4 February 2014
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 29 January 2014. 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
. injustice...
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
20 September 1989 at age 20. On 24 October 1990, you were
convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of unauthorized absence
(UA) from your unit and missing ship’s movement. On 6 September
.1991, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of UA
from your unit for a period of 43 days and missing ship's
movement. The sentence imposed was confinement and a forfeiture
of pay. You were notified of pending administrative discharge
processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to
misconduct. After consulting with legal counsel, you elected to
present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
On 20 December 1991, the ADB found that you committed misconduct
and recommended that you be separated with an OTH discharge.
Your commanding officer concurred with the ADB and forwarded his
recommendation to the separation authority. On 26 February
1992, the separation authority agreed with the recommendation of
the ADB and directed your commanding officer to issue you an OTH
discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense and on 17 March 1992, 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 and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of
your misconduct that resulted in an SCM and a SPCM. Finally,
there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows
for recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of.
time or an individual’s good behavior after’ discharge.
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,
Ree S
ROBERT D.~ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 05217 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR8891 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 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. You received restriction, extra duty and a forfeiture of pay.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06242-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | CY1999 | 05767-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on i8 May 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. On 4 February 1992 you were again convicted by SCM of a 28 day period of UA.
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.
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 | CY2006 | 09544-06
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 7 August 1989 at age 18. On 6 March 1992 you were so discharged and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00477 12
On 4 May 1990, you were UA for three days, with no disciplinary action taken. On 5 September and 1 October 1990, you were UA one day each, and no disciplinary action was taken against you. On 8 July 1991, you were UA again for one day and no disciplinary action was taken.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00740-09
Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your |... application on 28 October 2009. On 13 October 1964, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to unfitness. by the Board... .