Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6666 14_Redacted
Original file (NR6666 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

TAL
Docket No: 6666-14
9 July 2015

 

This is in reference. to your application for correction ef 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

17 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 and began a period of active duty on

22 May 1986. You served for two years and seven months without
disciplinary incident, but on 18 March 1988 and 6 April 1989 you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP). Your offenses were using
provoking gestures, conduct prejudicial to good order and
discipline and larceny.
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH)
discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense. You waived all of your procedural rights, including
your right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Your
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission
of a serious offense. The discharge authority approved this
recommendation and directed separation under OTH conditions by

reason of misconduct, and on 5 May 1989, you received the OTH.
.

 

“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 of racial
discrimination. Nevertheless, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of
your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct. The
Board noted that you waived your right to an ADB, your best
opportunity for retention or a better characterization of
service. Regarding your assertion, there is no indication in
the record that such problems, if they existed at the time of
your service, were so serious as to excuse you of responsibility
for your actions or were sufficiently mitigating to warrant
recharacterization. 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 | CY2014 | NR1004 14

    Original file (NR1004 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. You were so ‘discharge on 10 November 1992. : The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1004 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR1004 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 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10805 14

    Original file (NR10805 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 17 December 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2639 14

    Original file (NR2639 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 25 March 2015. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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 | NR1785 14

    Original file (NR1785 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 3 March 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2092 14

    Original file (NR2092 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 4 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 separation authority agreed with the recommendation of the ADB and directed your commanding officer to issue you an OTH discharge by reason of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5414 14

    Original file (NR5414 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 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1782 14

    Original file (NR1782 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. Subsequently, on 15 November 1994, administrative discharge action was initiated disorder, You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement, or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6699 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR6699 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 10 July 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 | CY2009 | 02644-09

    Original file (02644-09.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. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by...