DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SIN
Docket No: 04118-13
1 May 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 30 April 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 enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
27 March 1978. The Board found that during the period from
29 September 1978 to 19 January 1984, you received eight
nonjudiciai punishments (NJP’s}) for eight periods of unauthorized
absence (UA), destruction of government property and three
instances of disobedience. Subsequently, administrative
discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense. You elected to consult counsel
and have your case heard before an administrative discharge board
(ADB). On 10 February 1984, the ADB recommended separation
with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of
Misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On
14 February 1984, your commanding officer concurred with the
ADB’‘s findings and forwarded his recommendation that you be
discharged. On 13 April 1984, the separation authority directed
an OTH Gischarge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense. You were so discharged on 16 April 1984.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your eight NUP’s. 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,
Spr S caneneem
ROBERT D. Z2SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07266-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 2010. 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 error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6730 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. The Board found that on 17 May 1982, you were counseled regarding your misconduct and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant-to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2510-13
A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2014. You were "80 discharged .On 29 October 1992. , Ce The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially’ mitigating factors, such as your record of service, post service accomplishments, character letters, and desire to upgrade your discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2986-13
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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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 | CY2010 | 04436-10
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 17 April 1986, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (commission of a serious offense). ‘Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3628 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. The Board found that during the period from 3 June 1982 to 20 January 1984, you received five nonjudicial punishments (NUP’s) for two instances of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03552 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. The ADB voted to separate you with an OTH discharge due to misconduct (COSO).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00135-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2010. 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 Or your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2754-13
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 probable material error or . Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03179-12
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. Your case was forwarded recommending that you be discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason 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...