DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BJG
Docket No: 5170-13
29 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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 29 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. In addition, the Board considered the
report of the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB), dated 23 June
2012, a copy of which is attached.
After careful 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.
You enlisted in the Navy and entered a period cf active duty on
30 May 2012. You. received nonjudicial punishment on four
occasions for insubordination, assault (three instances),
dereliction of duty, and making a false official statement. You
were then advised that your command was processing you for
administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH)
characterization of service due to misconduct. You exercised
your procedural right to have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board (ADB). The ADB met, found you
had committed misconduct, and recommended an OTH
characterization of service. The separation authority concurred
with the finding and recommendation of the ADB. On 29 May 2006,
you received the OTH characterization of service due to
misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for
retention) reentry code. On 16 May 2012, the NDRB voted to
upgrade your characterization of service to general under
honorable conditions.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully
considered all potentially mitigating factors, such as your
youth, post service good conduct, and current desire to serve in
the armed forces. The Board concluded, however, that your
narrative reason for separation and reentry code should not be
changed due to your misconduct. The Board particularly noted
that NDRB did not change your narrative reason for separation.
Finally, the Board believed you were fortunate to receive a
characterization upgrade from the NDRB. 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,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4351 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 April 2014. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reentry code given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in two NUPs, a ‘civil conviction and that you were no longer qualified for submarine service... The Board believed you were fortunate to receive a general discharge since Sailors who are...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3358-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. have not exhausted your administrative remedy of submitting the attached Application for the Review of: Discharge or . 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 | CY2012 | 01067 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. The Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you did not request such action, and you have not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9464-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2014. The Board also considered the report of the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) dated 26 February - 2009, a copy of which is attached. The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, post service good conduct, current desire to remove your ~ NUP, and upgrade your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR637 13
You waived your procedural right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). However, the Board concluded that your reentry code should not be changed due to your misconduct and non-recommendation for reenlistment. 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 | NR2447 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2014. You exercised your procedural right to have your case considered by 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 | NR8237 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 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. Finally, your rank was PFC at the time of your discharge, so the Board had no basis to change your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 10173 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 2012. 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 8 September 1995, your case was heard and the ADB recommended that you receive an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR775 13
Since your discharge is less than 15 years old, you may apply to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) for a change to your character of service and narrative reason for separation. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 October 2013. 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 | NR5133 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 2014. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be upgraded due to your numerous acts 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.