Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5022 14
Original file (NR5022 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

 

EGA
Docket No: 5022-14
10 August 2015

Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
slates Codé, 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

7 May 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.

In regard to your request for a personal appearance, be advised
that Board regulations state personal appearances before the
Board are not granted as a right, but only when the Board
determines that such an appearance will serve some useful
purpose. In your case, the Board determined that a personal
appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on
the evidence of the record.

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 on 16 March 1983. You served without disciplinary incident
until 22 October 1985, when you received nonjudicial punishment
(NUP) for unauthorized absence. On 23 January 1986, you
received a second NUP for illegal use of a controlled substance.
As a result, you were recommended for an administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. On

9 May 1986, you were discharged with an other than honorable

characterization of service.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your character of service, age at the
time of misconduct, and your efforts to overcome your
addictions. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors

were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case, given the
seriousness of your, which included drug abuse. 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 or other matter not previously considered by
the Board within one year from the date of the Board’s decision.
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 | NR4395 14

    Original file (NR4395 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 29 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5408 14

    Original file (NR5408 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. 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 | NR12070 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR12070 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 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application with supporting documentation, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1610 14

    Original file (NR1610 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. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse at which time you waived your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR661 14

    Original file (NR661 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting an executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2015. — Finally, on10 October 1986, you received an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct ‘The Board, in its yeview of your entire record and application, 7 carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your . New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4915 14

    Original file (NR4915 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 6 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. Regarding your assertion, alcohol abuse may be a mitigating factor for misconduct; however, the Board felt your multiple incidents of misconduct prior...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06684-10

    Original file (06684-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 November 2010. 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 | 02216-09

    Original file (02216-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 2010. 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 | 01931-10

    Original file (01931-10.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 November 2010. 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 | NR7527 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7527 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 30 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 your case, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record.