Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4641 14
Original file (NR4641 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: 4641-14
22 April 2015

tar >

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 Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty 2 March 1978. You served for four months without
disciplinary incident, but during the period from 25 July 1978 to
11 December 1980, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) on
five occasions. Your offenses were unauthorized absence (UA),
failure to obey a lawful regulation, breaking restriction, and
absence from your appointed place of duty

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due to a frequent involvement
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 due to frequent involvement. The discharge authority
approved this recommendation and directed separation under other
than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on

16 January 1981, 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 relief in
your case because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct.
Further, you were given an opportunity to defend your actions,
but waived your procedural rights. 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 | NR1844 14

    Original file (NR1844 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 March 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Subsequently, he was notified of pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement, at which time he...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3991 14

    Original file (NR3991 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 2 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 material error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5268 14

    Original file (NR5268 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    aA three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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 | NR7094 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7094 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4155 14

    Original file (NR4155 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. 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 | CY2013 | NR8945 13

    Original file (NR8945 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 24 September 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4251 14

    Original file (NR4251 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 2 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5168 14

    Original file (NR5168 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 13 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. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement at which time you waived...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07871-07

    Original file (07871-07.rtf) 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.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 17 October 1975, you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. In connection with this processing, you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5146 13

    Original file (NR5146 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 23 April 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. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on...