Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5458 14
Original file (NR5458 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

 

SIN
Docket No: 5458-14
4 June 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

19 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.

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 22 February 1985. During the period from 22 August 1985
Co 11 August 1986, you received four nonjudicial punishments
(NJPs), one of which was for the wrongful use of marijuana.
Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. After being
afforded all of your procedural rights, your case was forwarded
to the separation authority recommending that you be retained on
active duty. On 26 November 1986 and 14 July 1987, you received
NJP. On 27 July 1987, administrative discharge action was
initiated by reason of misconduct. After being afforded all of
your procedural rights, your case was forwarded to the separation
authority recommending that you be separated. On 11 September

——S ee
1987, the separation authority concurred and directed an other
than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. You were so

discharged on 9 October 1987.

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

your record of service, desire to upgrade your discharge, post
service medical issues, and assertion that your misconduct was

directly related to chemical exposure, while stationed at Camp
Lejeune. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your six NJPs, one of which was for wrongful drug use, and
two after you were given an opportunity earn a better
characterization of service when your first ADB recommended your
retention on active duty. Regarding your assertion that your
chemical exposure contributed to your misconduct, the Board noted
that the severity of your misconduct outweighed the mitigations
of your assertion. Finally, there is no evidence in.the record
to support it, and you provided none. 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.

Sin Ii,

   

OBERT s ‘NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR494 14

    Original file (NR494 14.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 | CY2014 | NR4932 14

    Original file (NR4932 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 5 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 existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7488 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7488 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 6 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5300 14

    Original file (NR5300 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 19 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 | NR5464 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR5464 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 5 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2657 14

    Original file (NR2657 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A ‘three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered. 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. — Consequentiy, 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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR4115 13

    Original file (NR4115 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 30 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. 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 | NR477 14

    Original file (NR477 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. You were so discharged on 21 May 1986.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5751 14

    Original file (NR5751 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 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your...