Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5973 14
Original file (NR5973 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

      

= od
Sh Pe
SZ

JDR
Docket No: 5973-14
6 July 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

5 June 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, began a period of active duty on

8 December 1982, and served without disciplinary incident for
about three and a half months. However, during the period from
23 March 1983 to 9 January 1984, you received five nonjudicial
punishments (NJP) for a total of 18 days of unauthorized absence
(UA), being absent from your appointed place of duty, and
possession of drug paraphernalia.

Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. At that
time you elected to waive your procedural rights. Your case was
forwarded, recommending discharge under other than honorable
(OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct. The separation authority approved and directed an
OTH discharge and, on 13 January 1984, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your record of service and desire to upgrade your discharge.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
the seriousness of your misconduct which resulted in five NUPs.

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

 

as

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03160-12

    Original file (03160-12.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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned after your second NUP that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | NR3503 14

    Original file (NR3503 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 | NR4323 14

    Original file (NR4323 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 April 2015. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use. 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 | CY2010 | 03729-10

    Original file (03729-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of thé Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2011. Additionally, after your third NJP, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | 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 | NR5074 14

    Original file (NR5074 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 | NR6504 14

    Original file (NR6504 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 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4517 14

    Original file (NR4517 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. On 2 May 1986, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use. 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 12091-10

    Original file (12091-10.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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct. 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.