Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6765 14_Redacted
Original file (NR6765 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

 

TLG
Docket No: 6765-14
2 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. The application was filed in
a timely manner.

 

Although your application was not filed ina 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

1 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
27 April 1979. You served for about eight months without
disciplinary incident; but during the period from

7 December 1979 to 16 July 1982, you received seven nonjudicial
punishments (NJP) and were convicted by a civil court. Your
offenses were unauthorized absence (UA) for 112 days,
missing Ship’s movement, wrongfully using provoking words,
absence from appointed place of duty, possession of marijuana,
possession of drug paraphernalia, and second degree burglary.

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to a conviction by
a Civil court. After waiving your procedural rights, your
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a conviction
by a civil court. The discharge authority approved this
recommendation and directed separation under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct and on

14 October 1982, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your post service conduct, character statements, desire to
upgrade your discharge, and your assertion that your civil
conviction should not have had any bearing on your discharge.
Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant relief in your case given the seriousness
of your misconduct as evidenced by seven NJPs and civil
conviction.

Regarding your assertion, regulatory guidelines state that the
administrative separation process encompasses the performance
review of a Sailor’s entire record, which includes both the
military and civilian communities. In this regard, members of
the Armed Forces who are convicted by civil authorizes may be
administratively discharged for misconduct which occurred in
either community or the combined communities. 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 otiicial
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

|
2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR807 14

    Original file (NR807 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 11 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. 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 | NR764 14

    Original file (NR764 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 recora, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. occasions, were You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct {civil conviction). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5168 14

    Original file (NR5168 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 13 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. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement at which time you waived...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02317-09

    Original file (02317-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 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. You served without disciplinary infraction until 5 March 1979, when you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that was not terminated...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3901 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR3901 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 8 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 | CY2008 | 05252-08

    Original file (05252-08.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 | CY2014 | NR7285 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7285 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. 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 | NR4269 14

    Original file (NR4269 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 2 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. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement at which time you waived...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1998 14

    Original file (NR1998 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 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. ' In this regard, you submitted a request for a general discharge based on your overall record of service, -However,; an ADB and your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12070 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR12070 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 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 Board, in its review of your entire record and application with supporting documentation, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors,...