Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3007 14
Original file (NR3007 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARIMENT OF THE NAVY
OBRD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE {oo
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

in

 

SJN
Docket No: 3007-14
11 December 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.

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

18 November 2014. 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

25 June 2009. Your record is incomplete, in that it does not
contain the administrative discharge documentation pertaining to
your separation. However, based on your Certificate of Release
or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), you received a
general discharge due to a pattern of misconduct on 29 November
2010...

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your record of service and desire to upgrade your discharge.
Nevertheless, based on the information currently contained in
your record, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your pattern of misconduct. Finally, the Board noted 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. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.

It 1s 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

BER . O'NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3141-13

    Original file (NR3141-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701-5, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 - ARLINGTON, VA 22204-24906 : TIR

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7956 13

    Original file (NR7956 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 26 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 | CY2014 | NR2593 14

    Original file (NR2593 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 18 November 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5667 13

    Original file (NR5667 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. 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 | CY2013 | NR8360 13

    Original file (NR8360 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2014. New évidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this 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 | CY2014 | NR3304 14

    Original file (NR3304 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 5 November 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2223 13

    Original file (NR2223 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted is Support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. After careful and conscienticus consideration of the entire record, the Board found that 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 | CY2013 | NR2527-13

    Original file (NR2527-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 May 1994, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3488 14

    Original file (NR3488 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 25 March 2015. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insuffi 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 or...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3341-13

    Original file (NR3341-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 26 February 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of- your application, tegether 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...