Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR958 14
Original file (NR958 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

 

TAL
Docket No: 958-14
18 February 2015

 

pea

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

11 February 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.

Batter 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 Marine Corps on 13 May 1988 after two prior
period of active duty. You served for four months without
disciplinary incident, but during the period from 7 October 1988
to 13 June 1989, you received nonjudicial punishment (NOP) on two
occasions for failure to go to your appointed place of duty and
were convicted in civil court for driving under the influence
(DUI). On 8 January 1990, you were convicted by special court-
martial of unauthorized absence from your unit and wrongful use
of cocaine. The sentence imposed was confinement, a forfeiture
of pay, reduction in paygrade and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
On 24 November 1993, you received the BCD after appellate review

was complete.
Tig et ia EA REET SS — —

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. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in
your case because of the seriousness of your misconduct.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.

The Board believes that under current regulations you may be
eligible for veterans’ benefits which accrued during your first
two periods of service. Whether or not you are eligible for
benefits is a matter under the cognizance of the Department of
Veterans Affairs (DVA), and you should contact the nearest office
of the DVA concerning your right to apply for benefits.

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 | NR6797 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR6797 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 25 June 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 | CY2014 | NR4522 14

    Original file (NR4522 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 20 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4318 14

    Original file (NR4318 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. 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, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct due...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12219-09

    Original file (12219-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 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 | CY2007 | 07629-07

    Original file (07629-07.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 July 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. About two months later, on 22 March 1968, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a f our day period of UA. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6757 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR6757 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 , 1 July 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2163 14

    Original file (NR2163 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 30 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 carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your post service...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5880 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR5880 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 19 June 2015. After applying these guidelines to the evidence in the case, the Board was not able to substantiate the existence of PTSD 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 | CY2007 | 05868-07

    Original file (05868-07.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 reenlisted in the Navy on 14 December 1945 after two years of honorable service. You received the...

  • 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...