DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1i S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR ,
Docket No: 6604-13
24 July 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 22 July 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 and began a period of active duty on 11
April 1984. You served for about four months without
disciplinary incident, but during the period from 6 September
1984 to 4 April 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP)
on two occasions and were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM). Your offenses were five periods of unauthorized absence
(UA) totalling 67 days and absence from your appointed place of
duty. -
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. After
waiving your procedural rights, on 19 April 1985, your commanding
officer recommended discharge under other than honorable
. Conditions by reason of misconduct due to'a pattern of
misconduct. On 24 April 1985, the discharge authority approved
this réconmendation and directed separation under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on 3 May
1985,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 suffering
from drug abuse and not being afforded rehabilitation.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your misconduct which resulted in
‘two NJPs and an SPCM. Further, you were given an opportunity to
defend your actions, but waived your procedural rights. Finally, .
there'is no evidence in the record, and you submitted none, to
support 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,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7965 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02665-06
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.You enlisted in the Navy on 19 October 1982 at age 19, You served without disciplinary incident until...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03822-07
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.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 on 8 November 1983 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident until...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3131-13
Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2014. Documentary material considered by .the Board consisted of your application, together. _ 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 | CY2009 | 02229-09
the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 April 1985 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 30 April 1985, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07538-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2009. On 7 December 1984 your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04509-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2010. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6971 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 June 2015. 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 15 April and 30 May 1986, you received (NUP) for two specification of failing to obey a lawful order, a period of four days of UA, and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2657 14
A ‘three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered. 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. — Consequentiy, 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 | CY2009 | 10634-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...