DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJIR
Docket No: 5011-13
30 April 2014
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 23 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.
You enlisted in the Navy, began a period of active duty on 10
January 1990, and served for about five months without
disciplinary infraction. However, during the period from 2 May
to 18 July 1990, you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status
for 77 days and declared a deserter. Your record reflects that
on 27 July 1990 you received nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for an
unspecified offense.
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
After waiving your procedural rights, on 7 August 1990, your
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of
a serious offense. On 24 August 1990, the discharge authority
approved this recommendation and directed separation under other
than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on 31
August 1990, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and assertion of being
administratively separated without committing a criminal offense.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your unspecified misconduct which
resulted in NUP and lengthy period of UA. Further, you were
_ given an opportunity to defend your actions, but waived your
‘procedural right.-.Finally, there is evidence in the record that
is contrary to your assertion. 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,
TED | , Gone
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4551 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 injustice. - The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03627-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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 | CY2009 | 10742-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010. However, the record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this period of UA. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06412-06
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.On 13 September 1988 you enlisted in the Navy at age 20 and served without incident until 28 November...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02306-09
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, the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction, and on 7 March 2006, you were so discharged and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08132-07
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, your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00396-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 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. After waiving your procedural right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB}, on 13...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01395-03
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. to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | NR6085 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 July 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 | CY2014 | NR3859 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive: session, considered your application on 5 November 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...