Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6514 14
Original file (NR6514 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

BC
Docket No: 06514-14
17 November 2014

 

Dear

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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 13 November 2014.. 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 and began a period of active duty on 30
October 1978. During the period from 23 July to 9 November
1979, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four
occasions for three periods of unauthorized absence (UA)
totaling nine days, two periods of absence from your appointed
place of duty, disobedience, and breach of the peace. On 9
November and again on 11 March 1980, you received NUP for three
periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, five
specifications of disobedience, disrespect, and assault.

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement
of a discreditable nature with military authorities, at which
time you waived your procedural rights to consult with legal
counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge
board (ADB). Your commanding officer recommended discharge
under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct
due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with
military authorities. The discharge authority approved this
recommendation and directed separation under other than
honorable conditions by reason of wisconduct, and on 13 June
1980, you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4 (ineligible
for reenlistment) reentry code.

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
have slight brain damage. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case
because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct.

Further, you were given an opportunity to defend your actions,
but waived your procedural rights. Finally, there is no
evidence in the record, and you provided none, to support your
assertion. 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 im usec .

Sincerely,

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08151-07

    Original file (08151-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 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, regulations, and policies. On 6 March 1980 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed discharge under other than honorable conditions, and on 27 March...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01113-07

    Original file (01113-07.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 1 December 1977 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident until 8...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04701-10

    Original file (04701-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 March 2011. 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 | CY1999 | 07289-09

    Original file (07289-09.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 | CY2009 | 07289-09

    Original file (07289-09.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 | CY2006 | 00768-06

    Original file (00768-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2006. 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 | CY2004 | 01198-04

    Original file (01198-04.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. On 8 November 1980 you were again notified of administrative separation processing by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, and you waived all of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6929 13

    Original file (NR6929 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. After waiving your procedural rights, your commanding officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05380-08

    Original file (05380-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 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 | CY2003 | 05149-03

    Original file (05149-03.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 reenlisted in the Navy on 14 November 1980 after three years of prior honorable service. On that...