. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BJG
Docket No: 6869-13
28 July 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 23 July 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 7
September 2001, 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 began a period of active duty on 9
June 1983. You received nonjudicial punishment on five
occasions and were convicted by a special court-martial. Your
offenses included wrongful use of cocaine and marijuana, failure
to obey a lawful order, disrespect, breach of the peace,
assault, and communicating a threat (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 6 April 1988, 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, character reference letters,
and current desire to upgrade your discharge. The Board
concluded, however, that your discharge should not be changed
due to your misconduct and drug abuse. The Board noted that you
waived your right to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention
r a better characterization of service. You are advised that
no discharge is upgraded based merely on 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,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3463-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. 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 error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3467-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 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 | NR8231 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. 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 | 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 | NR4714 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 8 April 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 | 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 | 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3575-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2014. In October 1989, you received an OTH characterization of service discharge due to misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) . 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 | NR7777 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 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 | NR4737 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 8 April 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.