Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6334 14
Original file (NR6334 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

 

ES
Docket No: 6334-14
12 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 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 30 May 1980. You served for about 19 months without
disciplinary incident, but during the period from

4 December 1981 to 8 July 1983, you were convicted by special
court-martial (SPCM) and received two nonjudicial punishments
(NJP) for disrespect on two different occasions, dereliction of
duty, wrongful use of marijuana, and damaging the personal
property.
Sa =o =

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to pattern of
misconduct, at which time you elected your procedural rights to
consult with legal counsel and to request a hearing before an

 

administrative discharge board (ADB). The ADB recommended
discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct due pattern of misconduct. The discharge authority

approved this recommendation and directed separation under other
than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on
20 October 1983, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your period of satisfactory service and desire to upgrade your
discharge. Nevertheless, based on the information currently
contained in your record, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant an upgrade of your discharge given the
seriousness of your misconduct which resulted in SPCM and two
NJPs. 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 | CY2006 | 08109-06

    Original file (08109-06.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.You enlisted in the Navy on 22 May 1980 at age 18. on 11 June and 10 December 1981 you received...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5021 14

    Original file (NR5021 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. 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 | CY2011 | 03090-11

    Original file (03090-11.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 January 2012. 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 a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08019-08

    Original file (08019-08.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 June 2009. 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 | 04313-09

    Original file (04313-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 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. records.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4340 14

    Original file (NR4340 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 | CY2012 | 03979-12

    Original file (03979-12.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 February 2013. 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 6 April 1984, your case was heard by the ADB and by a unanimous vote of 3-0 you were recommended for administrative separation with an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02403-09

    Original file (02403-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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 | CY2013 | NR4297 13

    Original file (NR4297 13.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. You received NJP on three additional occasions for failure to go to your appointed place of duty and two instances of UA from your unit for a period totaling four days. oo The Board also noted that you should contact Headquarters, United States Marine Corps, Code MMSB, 3280 Russell Road,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03588-06

    Original file (03588-06.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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 31 July 1979 at age 17. However, on 4 and 13 January 1983 you...