Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3845 14
Original file (NR3845 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

TAL
Docket No: 3845-14
24 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 ina 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

2 April 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

23 August 1990. You served for four months without disciplinary
incident, but during the period from 29 January 1991 to

8 January 1992, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two
occasions. Your offenses were failure to go to your appointed
place of duty, dereliction in the performance of duties, under-
age drinking and wrongful use of marijuana

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due commission of a serious
offense at which time you waived your procedural rights to
consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). Your commanding officer
recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. The
discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed
separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct, and on 6 March 1992, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your character letters and 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. The Board noted that you
waived your right to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention
or a better characterization of service. 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'NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1785 14

    Original file (NR1785 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 3 March 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1004 14

    Original file (NR1004 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 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. You were so ‘discharge on 10 November 1992. : The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2639 14

    Original file (NR2639 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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 | NR1810 14

    Original file (NR1810 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    three-member panel of the Board for: Correction of Naval Records, - sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. 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 commission of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1004 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR1004 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 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6689 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR6689 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 17 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 | NR520 14

    Original file (NR520 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 21 January 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 | CY2010 | 01584-10

    Original file (01584-10.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. Further, you were given an opportunity to defend your actions, but waived your procedural ‘yight to present your case to an ADB. 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 | NR6666 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR6666 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 17 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. 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 | CY2009 | 04481-09

    Original file (04481-09.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. On 3 June 1992, the separation authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...