DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
' BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 2801-13
21 February 2014
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 12 February 2014.. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in aceordance 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 oe probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 29
‘June 1976 at age 17. On 2 March 1977, you received nonjudicial
‘punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit
for a period of eight days. On 7 July 1977, you were
apprehended by Italian civil authorities, charged with
assaulting a prostitute with a knife and placed in pretrial
confinement. On 24 November 1977, you signed an agreement to
trial in absentia and were transferred back to the.United
‘States. On 29 December 1977, you were discharged by reason of
‘convenience of the government. You were discharged under
honorable conditions based on your conduct mark average.
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct and
proficiency averages computed from marks assigned on a periodic
basis. Your conduct average was 2:6. At the time of your
service, a conduct average of 4.0 was required for a fully
honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of your 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 upgrading your
“discharge given your. misconduct that resulted in an NUP, civil
‘charges in Italy and failure to attain the required average in
conduct. Finally, there is no provision of law or in Navy
regulations that allows for. recharacterization of service due
- solely to the passage of time. The Board believed you were
‘fortunate to receive a general characterization of service,
since Sailors who have committed misconduct normally receive
other than honorable discharges. Accordingly, your application
has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the
pane? will be furnished upen 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,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4121 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 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. Although your SPCM was dismissed, your NJP offense occurred in August 1977, making you ineligible for a Good Conduct Medal.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01492-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 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. An average of 4.0 in conduct was required at the time of your discharge for a fully honorable characterization of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3840-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 12 March 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3140-13
Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2014. On 14 July 1978 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed a general discharge by reason of unsuitability, and on 21 July 1978, you were so separated. -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 | CY2005 | 02637-05
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your repetitive misconduct and your failure to attain the required average in military behavior. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6602 13
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 Reckabis Material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09566-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 July 2010. The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade E-2. 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 | NR4632 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2014. The Board also noted that you were fortunate to have been retained on active duty to earn a better characterization of service after your second SPCM for a very lengthy 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 or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01672-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 2010. The Board noted that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge, since an individual who has committed misconduct such as yours normally receives an other “than honorable characterization of service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1815 14
-A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...