DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BUG
Docket No: 5842-13
29 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 28 May 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, dated 10 December
1982, 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 of active duty on
1 February 1979. You received nonjudicial punishment on seven
occasions for absence from your appointed place of duty {eight
instances), seven periods of unauthorized absence totaling six
days, dereliction of duty, disobeying a lawful order, failure to
obey a lawful order (two instances), wrongful possession and use
of marijuana, being drunk on duty, and wrongful possession of
hashish (two instances). 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 waived your procedural right to have your case
heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 20 January
1981, you received the OTH characterization of service due to
misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for
retention) reenlistment code.
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 upgrade
- your discharge. ‘The Board concluded, however, that your
discharge should'‘net be changed due to your numerous acts of
misconduct. The Board particularly noted that you waived your
right to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
_will be furnished upon request.
i
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,
oth AX eo
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6780 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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 | CY2013 | NR7757 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 19 August 2014. On 9 February 1987, you received an OTH characterization of: service discharge due to Misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden igs on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
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 | CY2013 | NR5808 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2014. You were then advised that your command was administratively separating you with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4019 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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 | NR8238 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 4 September 2014. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | NR6284 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 10 June 2014. Your commanding officer then recommended you for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service discharge due to 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8236 13
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The ADB found that you had committed misconduct, and recommended that you receive an OTH characterization of service. 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 | NR4306 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2014. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in five NJPs and a civil conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
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.