Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3251-13
Original file (NR3251-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
"ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

TAL ;
Decket No: 3251-13
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 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 9 April 1988 after more than four
years of prior honorable service. on 30 July 1996, you were .
arraigned in Newport News, Virginia, on two counts cf forcible

. Sodomy of an Air Force airman who later died. “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 16 January 1997,
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 14 March 1997, the separation
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable
service, Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were

provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for

Sincerely,

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4052 13

    Original file (NR4052 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 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 | CY2013 | NR4276 13

    Original file (NR4276 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2495-13

    Original file (NR2495-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, . Subsequently, administrative discharge “action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful 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 or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4099-13

    Original file (NR4099-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application’ on 26 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3345-13

    Original file (NR3345-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ' Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 February 2014. The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service. 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 | NR2238-13

    Original file (NR2238-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board Records, sitting in executive sess application on 11 February 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5417 14

    Original file (NR5417 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 June .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 | CY2013 | NR7400 13

    Original file (NR7400 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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, After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3860-13

    Original file (NR3860-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval _ Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ; application on 19 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 | NR2433-13

    Original file (NR2433-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 a pattern of misconduct. 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.