Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6699 14_Redacted
Original file (NR6699 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

TAL
Docket No: 6699-14
6 August 2015

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10, 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

10 July 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

2 January 1986. You served for a year and five months without
disciplinary incident, but on 3 June 1987, you were convicted by
special court-martial (SPCM) of forgery and wrongful use of
cocaine. The sentence imposed was confinement at hard labor, a
forfeiture of pay and reduction in paygrade.

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge
due to misconduct. After consulting with legal counsel, you
elected to present your case to an administrative discharge board
(ADB). On 24 September 1987, the ADB found that you committed
misconduct and recommended that you be separated with an OTH
discharge. Your commanding officer concurred with the ADB and
forwarded his recommendation to the separation authority. The
separation authority agreed with the recommendation of the ADB
and directed your commanding officer to issue you an OTH
discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense and on 7 December 1987, you were so discharged.

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 suffering
from a bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder

(PTSD) . Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the
seriousness of your misconduct. Regarding your assertion of
suffering from a bipolar disorder and PTSD, the Board considered
whether these disorders were a causative factor in your
misconduct. After full and careful consideration of the matter,
the Board determined that there was insufficient evidence in the
record to support a conclusion that a causal relationship with
either the bipolar disorder or PTSD symptoms and your offenses
exists. Specifically, the Board concluded that the forgery and
wrongful drug use were not caused by either your bipolar disorder
or PTSD, and that even if there was a nexus between them, the
severity of the misconduct would substantially outweigh any
mitigation created by these disorders. 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 reqularity
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.

Sincergly,

   

 

ROBERT J. O’NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • 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...

  • 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 | NR7771 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7771 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 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. In your case, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record.

  • 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 | NR0896 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR0896 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 18 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR896 14

    Original file (NR896 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5147 14

    Original file (NR5147 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 15 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. 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 | NR583 14

    Original file (NR583 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 3 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use.

  • 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...