Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3211 14
Original file (NR3211 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
‘DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 §, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001

ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

EGA
Docket No: 3211-14
16 January 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.

A three-member panel of the Roard for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 14 January 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 on 20 June 1996 and served without
disciplinary incident until 30 September 1997, when you received
non-judicial punishment for wrongful use of marijuana. On 25
November 1997, you were administratively discharged with an
other than honorable characterization of service by reason of

misconduct.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your characterization of service and the
statement regarding your service. Nevertheless, the Boaré
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in
your case because of the seriousness of your misconduct, which
included drug abuse. Accordingly, your application has been
denied.

Et 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.

tn this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a .
‘presumption of reguiarity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official

naval record, the burden 1s on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

a

/

‘ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR646 14

    Original file (NR646 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. 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 | CY2014 | NR5848 14

    Original file (NR5848 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 27 May 2015. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the reason for your discharge or recharacterization of your discharge given your three NJPs, and the fact that you were warned of the consequences of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6418 14

    Original file (NR6418 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 8 May 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7087 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7087 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 23 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. In regard to your assertions, the Board determined that your allegations of harassment and discrimination do not excuse your misconduct or failure...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4682 14

    Original file (NR4682 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 19 May 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 evror...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3735 14

    Original file (NR3735 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 20 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1623 14

    Original file (NR1623 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel ofthe 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. 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 | 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 | CY2014 | NR4119 14

    Original file (NR4119 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 15 April 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 | CY2014 | NR3911 14

    Original file (NR3911 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 8 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 probable...