DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SJN
Docket No: 07431-06
26 January 2007

This is in references 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 o 23 January 2007. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations a procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your applicant, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.

After careful nd conscientious consideration of the entire record, the B rd found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish t e existence of probable material error or injustice.

You reenlisted in the Navy on 19 June 1981 after three years of honorable ser ce. You served without incident until 27 March 1985 when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for drunken driving.

On 27 February 1986 you were counseled and warned about your failure to pa just debts. You were offered assistance through your chain-of- command and informed that further misconduct could make you eligible for administrative separation action.

During the period from 13 to 20 March 1985 you wrote five worthless checks totaling about over $137. On 21 March 1985 you were arrested or two of those checks, but were subsequently released after making good on the checks and paying a fine.

On 2 September 1986 you received a second NJP for writing a bad check in the count of $12 and were reduced to paygrade E-4. On 5 September 1986 you were notified of pending administrative separation ac ion by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. You waived your right to consult with counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).

It was requested and you submitted a statement of your financial status and indebtedness to your commanding officer for evaluation on 10 September 1986. On 15 September 1986, your commanding officer forward his recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. In his letter he state , in part, that you had received numerous letters of indebtedness for writing bad checks and failure to pay your debts and, in site of repeated counseling efforts, you were unable to get your financial affairs in order and had become a tremendous administrative burden to the command. On 30 October 1986 the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by re son of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On 5 November 1 86 you were so discharged.

The Board, in i s review of your entire record and application, carefully weigh d all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service, the period of good service in your last enlistment, and your personal problems prior to separation. However, the Bo rd found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of indebtedness, writing bad checks, and the two NJP’s, one of which was for writing a bad check after you were counseled and warned of the consequences of further misconduct. Further, you waived the rig t to an ADB, your best chance 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.

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, hen 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

2