Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6680 13
Original file (NR6680 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7015. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

SJN
Docket No: 6680-13
30 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'29 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.

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
18 November 1980. The Board found that on 19 January 1981, you
signed an administrative remarks document stating that you had
committed a fraudulent enlistment by failing to disclose your
preservice use of drugs, and that you were being retained for
further service. However, you were warned that further
misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
During the period from 28 August 1981 to 30 April 1982, you
received four nonjudicial punishments (NJP's) for two instances
of failing to go to your appointed place of duty, disobedience,
wrongful possession of marijuana, and leaving your ship in an
unauthorized manner. Although your record does not contain all
of the documents pertaining to your discharge, it appears you
were notified of pending administrative separation action by
reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities. The separation
authority directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct.
You were so discharged on 3 September 1982.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
—_____all_potentially mitigating _factors,_such_as your record of ~ ____
service and desire to upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless, the
Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant any
change in your discharge given your four NUP’s, one of which was
for the wrongful possession of marijuana, and the fact that you

warned of the consequences of further misconduct when you were
retained in the service. The Board found that you were fortunate
to receive a general discharge since a discharge under other than
honorable conditions is often directed when an individual is
discharged for misconduct. Finally, you are advised that there
is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for
recharacterization of a discharge automatically after six months
or 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,

RN
ROBERT (eo

Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3671-13

    Original file (NR3671-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 1 September 1982 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason' of misconduct, and on 24 September .1982, 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 that you should not have been discharged for wrongful possession of such a small amount of marijuana. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6730 13

    Original file (NR6730 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. The Board found that on 17 May 1982, you were counseled regarding your misconduct and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant-to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7243 13

    Original file (NR7243 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 5 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 | CY2009 | 02277-09

    Original file (02277-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 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. 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 | CY2001 | 04378-01

    Original file (04378-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    considered your application on 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. The Board noted that at the time of your reenlistment, you had two years of prior active service and should have been well aware of the consequences of abusing drugs. The Board believed that you were fortunate that CNMPC directed a general discharge since most...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6780 13

    Original file (NR6780 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 16 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 | CY2007 | 08482-07

    Original file (08482-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 2008. 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11635-09

    Original file (11635-09.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 7 May 1984, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct. On 10 July 1984, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an under other than honorable discharge due to misconduct for drug abuse.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03814-07

    Original file (03814-07.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 3 January 1982 the discharge authority directed discharge under honorable conditions by reason of drug abuse. 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 | NR1637 14

    Original file (NR1637 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, . Additionally, you were counseled and warned after your first NJP, that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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...