Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5696 13
Original file (NR5696 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

TAL
Docket No: 5696-13
11 June 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 4 June 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 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

7 October 1996 at age 25. On 23 June 1998, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for unauthorized absence (UA) from
your unit for a period of six days. You received an evaluation
report for the period of 22 January to 15 July 1998 that stated
you received eight administrative remarks page 13s for failure
to pay just debts. You were rated with significant problems and
not recommended for retention. Based on the information
currently contained in your record it appears that you were
subsequently processed for separation by reason of misconduct
(pattern of misconduct). In connection with this processing,
you would have acknowledged the separation action and the
discharge authority would have approved a recommendation for
separation. The record clearly shows that on 2 September 1998,
you were discharged with an other than honorable separation by
reason of misconduct (pattern of misconduct).

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge or change the narrative reason for separation
given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in an NUP
and your established pattern of failure to pay just debts.
Finally, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations
that allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the
passage of time. 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, 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,
© eS oh ——

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5673 13

    Original file (NR5673 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2014. 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01372-09

    Original file (01372-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of.the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 December 2009. 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. You were warned that further deficiencies or misconduct could result in administrative ‘discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8150 13

    Original file (NR8150 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. You elected to consult with legal counsel and subsequently requested 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 | CY2010 | 04435-10

    Original file (04435-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2011. 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to one in favor of an administrative honorable discharge due to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2657 14

    Original file (NR2657 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 09594-09

    Original file (09594-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 July 2010. You continued to serve without disciplinary incident until 6 October 1994, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for larceny and wrongful appropriation. 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 | CY2011 | 02336-11

    Original file (02336-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 2011. 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. Further, on 23 May 1994, you received NUP for breaking restriction which was imposed on 29 March 1994.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3597 14

    Original file (NR3597 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on 2 March 1993, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00185-07

    Original file (00185-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 10 December 1990 you were notified of pending administrative separation action 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04886-09

    Original file (04886-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2010. 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,...