‘DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7Ol S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-24906
TAT,
Docket No: 3597-14
2 April 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,
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 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 15 July 1991 after three years of
prior service. On 5 February 1992, you were counseled for
failure to pay your debts on time and warned that continued
deficiencies could result in administrative discharge. On
21 January 1993, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for
unauthorized absence from your unit.
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct
as evidenced by an established pattern of failure to pay just
debts. You waived your procedural rights to consult with legal
counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge
board (ABD). Your commanding officer recommended discharge under
other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a
pattern of misconduct. The discharge authority approved this
recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct, and on 2 March 1993, 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
found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of
your misconduct. Further, the Board noted that you waived the
right to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. Finally, no discharge is
automatically upgraded due to the passage of time or an
individual's good behavior after discharge. 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’NETLL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7666 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 July 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 | CY2009 | 01372-09
A three-member panel of.the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 December 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. You were warned that further deficiencies or misconduct could result in administrative ‘discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5673 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 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 error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04435-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to one in favor of an administrative honorable discharge due to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04179-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 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. 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 | NR3839 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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. information currently contained: in your record, the Board concluded’ these factors were-not sufficient to warrant an upgrade of your discharge given...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00551 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 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. 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 | NR5551 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. 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 | NR5397 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3590 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval. 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.