DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BJG
Docket No: 5881-13
28 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 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.
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
21 August 1985. You received nonjudicial punishment on two
occasions for unauthorized absence (two periods totaling 96
days) and missing ship’s movement (two instances). Your
commanding officer then recommended you for administrative
separation with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization
of service discharge due to misconduct. You waived your
procedural right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On
30 September 1988, you received an OTH characterization of
service discharge due to misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4
(not recommended for retention) reenlistment code.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth,
allegation of being assaulted, and current desire to upgrade
your discharge. However, the Board concluded that your
discharge should not be changed due to acts of serious
misconduct. The Board noted that you waived your right to an
ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. Regarding your allegation, there
is no evidence in your record to support it, and you provided no
such evidence. Finally, you are advised that no discharge is
upgraded automatically due solely to the passage of time or post
service good conduct. In view of the above, 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,
TR pe SES fo
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5880 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2014. You were then advised that your command was recommending you for administrative separation 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 | NR5838 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 28 May 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 | 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 | NR3591-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 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 | NR5842 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2014. You waived your procedural right to have your case heard 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 | NR6810 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 2014. You were then advised that your command was recommending you for administrative separation 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 | NR3589-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19. 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 material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5931 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 3 June 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 | NR6869 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 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 | NR6981 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 29 July 2014. On 13 January 1988, you received an OTH characterization of service discharge due to misconduct (COSO), and were assigned an RE-4 (not. 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.