DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
CRS
Docket No: 3530-13
30 April 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.
fot.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction ‘of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 6 March 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 é¢areful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient’ to- establish the existence: ‘of ‘probable material
error or. injustice: a .
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy Reserve on 21
August, 1992. On 27 May 1993, ao were convicted: “by a summary
theredfter; you: ware absént without neuthority from ‘12: December
1993 to 20 February 1998; a‘ total: of ‘1,528 days. You received a
discharge under other than fienorable: conditions: ‘on ‘21 April 1998
pursuant ‘to’ your Yequest: ‘for discharge’ ‘for tHe good’ of! the ~
service in. liew of trial by court-martial. -
in its Yeview'of. your application the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
service, ‘and » the’ unsubstantiated ‘Contention’ ‘that gu were* a
Roe. 3 ™ a a . ‘s ae ae
ci MST lies oitte ue oie whe afin t
homosexual. It found these factors insufficient to warrant
corrective action in your case given your lengthy period of
unauthorized absence. In addition, the Board believed that
considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for
discharge was approved since, by that action, you avoided the
possibility of a Federal conviction, confinement at hard labor
and a punitive discharge. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.
Considering your request for advancement to pay grade E-2 to be
shown on your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty (DD Form 214), the Board found insufficient evidence to
show that you were discharged in that pay grade.
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,
Rack Dt
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5417 14
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 | CY2012 | NR273 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 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, You reenlisted in the Navy on 1 January 1989. The Board, in its review of your application, carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors in your case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02604-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 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 | CY2013 | NR6091 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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 | NR645 13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 §. 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 | CY2013 | NR2223 13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted is Support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. After careful and conscienticus consideration of the entire record, the Board found that 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06704-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 2011. Your record contains an adverse performance evaluation for the period from 8 June 1993 to 30 June 1994 which reflects, in part, that you were not recommended for advancement or retention. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3686 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. On 20 June 1977 a panel of the Naval Discharge Review Board {NDRB}, convened under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP) and upgraded your undesirable discharge to general under honorable conditions. the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4415 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. 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 | NR7406 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. Nevertheless, based on the information currently contained in your record, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your NJP, and conviction by SPCM of a period of UA that lasted over 14 months, ending with your...