“DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7015. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1O0T
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 2417-14
17 March 2015
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 11 March 2015. After careful consideration of
your application, the Board concluded that your application was
not timely filed, and that it would not be in the interest of
justice to excuse your failure to submit your application in a
timely manner. Specifically, you provided the statement ‘For
reason of injustice double jeopardy. No Marine or service member
is subject to double jeopardy pending the seriousness of the
crime. I pled to a low level misdemeanor.’ as the basis for
waiving the statute of limitations. The Board determined that
_the reason you provided was insufficient to waive the statute of
limitations and there .is no evidence provided that indicates you
were unable to file your application within the three years from
when you learned of your characterization of service.
You may request reconsideration of this decision within one year
from the date of the Board’s decision. However, your request
must include newly discovered relevant evidence which was not
reasonably available to you when you submitted your application.
Further, the evidence must pertain to the timeliness of your
application or to its merits. Absent such additional evidence,
further review of your application is not possible.
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR880 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2015. 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 | CY2001 | 08643-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2002. On 6 October 1977 an ADB recommended an other than honorable discharge by reasion of misconduct due to civil conviction. 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 | CY2007 | 00417-07
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.On 25 March 1970 you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with parental consent and served without incident...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04968-01
contentions that you were punished twice for the same offense, thus becoming a victim of double-jeopardy, and that your martial conviction did not warrant an other than honorable Additionally, the Board considered your contention discharge. that your diagnosed schizophrenia was the cause of your periods The Board concluded these factors and contentions were of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05240-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
AF | DRB | CY2015 | FD-2015-00056
GENERAL: Theapplicantappealsfor upgradeofdischargetoHonorable. TheapplicantwasofferedapersonalappearancebeforetheDischargeReviewBoard(DRB)butdeclinedandrequeststhatthereviewbecompletedbasedontheavailableservicerecord.Theattachedbriefcontainsavailablepertinentdataontheapplicantandthefactorsleadingtothedischarge. FINDING: TheBoarddeniestheupgradeofthedischarge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04559-01
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. Reference (b) is the performance evaluation etition contained in reference (a). removal of the report is simply not Even if he had, Unless and until that action is set aside or the Board is haste the Board Subj: MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD ADVISORY SERGEANT HE CASE...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03502-11
A three-member panel of ‘the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2012. 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, Navy regulations state that all CO’s must process for separation Sailors who have committed misconduct due to drug abuse, and since you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00204-07
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 also considered the letter from the Deputy Commandant, Manpower and Reserve Affairs, dated 10 January 2007, and the letter from Sergeant Major B---, United States Marine Corps, dated 18 November 2007.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008454
On 20 March 1986, the U.S. Army Court of Military Review (USACMR) considered the applicant's appeal, found that the findings and sentence were correct in law and fact, and affirmed the findings and sentence. On 10 November 1986, he was discharged from the Army with a BCD under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 3, as a result of court-martial. Army Regulation 27-10 (Military Justice), paragraph 3-10,...