Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4860 14
Original file (NR4860 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: 4860-14
14 May 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

6 May 2015. The names and votes of the member 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

4 December 1989. You served for three months without
disciplinary incident, but during the period from 26 April 1990
to 22 March 1991, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on
five occasions. Your offenses were failure to obey a lawful
order, absence from your appointed place of duty, and failure to
go to your appointed place of duty. On 29 November 1991, you
were convicted by general court-martial of conspiring to commit
larceny and larceny. The sentence imposed was confinement, a
forfeiture of pay, payment of a fine, reduction in paygrade and
a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 2 March 1993, you received
the BCD after appellate review was complete.

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 and your health problems.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the
seriousness of your repeated misconduct. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.

In regard to your request for a copy of your naval record, you
may obtain a copy of your naval record by submitting the
enclosed Request Pertaining to Military Records, SF 180, to
National Personnel Records Center (Military Personnel Records),
9700 Page Boulevard, St Louis, MO 63132.

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

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6366 14

    Original file (NR6366 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 1 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12036 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR12036 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 4 August 2015. 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 and assertion that you were found guilty of only one theft. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR657 14

    Original file (NR657 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4944 14

    Original file (NR4944 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 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 | NR7268 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7268 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 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 | NR7657 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7657 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 1 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 | CY2014 | NR2638 14

    Original file (NR2638 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. 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 | NR13277 14

    Original file (NR13277 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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 | CY2009 | 07353-09

    Original file (07353-09.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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10507-07

    Original file (10507-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    10507-07 26 March 2008This 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.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,...