DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7G! S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 2092-14
13 March 2015
Dear ape:
“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.
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of
limitations and consider your application on its merits. A
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, -
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
4 March 2015. ‘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 reenlisted in the Navy on 31 July 1984 after more than four
years of prior service. You served for four years and two months
without disciplinary incident, but during the period of
12 September 1988 to 26 January 1989, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) on three occasions. Your offenses were failure
to go to your appointed place of duty, disrespect toward a
commissioned officer, wrongful use of cocaine, and unauthorized
absence.
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge
due to misconduct. After consulting with legal counsel, you
elected to present your case to an administrative discharge board
(ADB). On 6 February.1989, the ADB found that you committed
misconduct and recommended that you be separated with an OTH
discharge. Your commanding officer concurred with the ADB and
forwarded his recommendation to the separation authority. The
separation authority agreed with the recommendation of the ADB
and directed your commanding officer to issue you an OTH
discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission .of a serious
offense and on 21 April 1989, 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. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in
your case because of the seriousness of your misconduct.
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 within one year from the date of the Board’s decision.
New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in your case. 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 J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1785 14
limitations and consider your application on its merits.- A - three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6666 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. 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 | CY2014 | NR10805 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 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 | CY2011 | 00148-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 28 September 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. On 14 August 1989, the ADB found that you committed misconduct and recommended that you be separated with an OTH discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2639 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 2015. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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 | NR1004 14
A. three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 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. You were so ‘discharge on 10 November 1992. : The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1004 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02730-11
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8690 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. On 25 January 1989, the ADB found that you committed misconduct (commission of a serious offense) and recommended that you be separated with an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12399-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2009. On 17 June 1993, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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.