Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2396 14
Original file (NR2396 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 7001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

EGA
Docket No: 2396-14

13 April 2015

 

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

26 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 enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
(19 January 1983. You served without disciplinary incident until
11 May 1984, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
wrongful use of a controlled substance. On 20 November 1984,
you received a second NUP for wrongful use of a controlled
Substance. As a result, you were recommended for an
administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug
abuse. On 16 December 1984, you were discharged with an other
than honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your character of service and your mental |
illness assertion. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case,
given the seriousness of your repeated misconduct. Finally,
there is no evidence in the record, and you provided none, to
support your assertions. Accordingly, your application has been .
denied. - “Be : 7 :

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 within one year from the date of the Board’s decision.
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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4018 14

    Original file (NR4018 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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR896 14

    Original file (NR896 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service, desire to upgrade your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0896 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR0896 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01971-08

    Original file (01971-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 2008. 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 | NR4676 14

    Original file (NR4676 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In regard to your assertion, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence that the assignment of an RE-4B reentry code was not due to an administrative error and WaS appropriate for your situation. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 | 10999-10

    Original file (10999-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 July 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 4 May 1984 the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6299 14

    Original file (NR6299 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 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. 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 | CY2014 | NR12509 14

    Original file (NR12509 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, - Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 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. Asa result, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR767 14

    Original file (NR767 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 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. 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 | CY2015 | NR2815 15_Redacted

    Original file (NR2815 15_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 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...