DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2496
TJR
Docket No: 4905-13
29 April 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 15 April 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. oo
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 31
July 1972. You served for about six months without disciplinary
incident, however, during the period from 8 January 1973 to 12
August 1975, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) on 10
occasions and were convicted: by summary court-martial (SCM).
Your offenses were six periods of unauthorized absence (UA)
totalling 55 days, five periods of absence from your appointed
place of duty, use of provoking words/gestures, disrespect, two
specifications of failure to obey a lawful order, dereliction of
duty, and two specifications of disobedience. As a result, on 6
June 1975, you were notified of administrative separation by
reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities. After consulting
with legal counsel, you elected to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 14 August 1375 an ADB
recommended separation under other than honorable conditions by
reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities. Subsequently,
your commanding officer, in concurrence with the ADB, also
recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities. on 4 September
1975 the discharge authority approved these recommendations and
directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of unfitness, and on 18 September 1975, you were so
separated.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your post service conduct, desire to upgrade your discharge, and
character reference letters. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case
because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct which
resulted in 10 NJPs and an SCM. Accordingly, your application
has been denied.
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,
Te Re GD aR eran
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09388-07
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, 2 September 1975, an ADB recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03451-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 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 | CY2012 | 03288-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02231-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 September 2000. 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 and applicable statutes, regulations, thereof, your naval record, and policies. Given all the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 03286-05
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, advisory opinion, 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 Marine Corps on 17 December 1973 at age 17 with parental...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02638-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 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. Further, Marines with an extensive record of misconduct, such as yours, who are discharged by reason of unfitness normally receive discharges...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13341-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 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 | CY2011 | 04042-11
On 11 January 1977 you received NUP for absence from your appointed place of duty and two specifications of failure to obey a lawful order. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of the narrative reason for separation because of the seriousness of your repeated and frequent misconduct which resulted in nine NUJPs, counselling on several occasions for involvement of a discreditable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 09051-03
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 Boardfoundthe evidence submitted was insucifficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.Yours theenter the Navy at age 17. However, on 5 November 1975 you received another NJP for two UA’s...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10254-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 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...