DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1I S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100f
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TJR :
Docket No: .9802-14/
. 8655-97
25 September 2014
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. :
A: three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records ,- sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 24 September. 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, tegether 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 21 April 1995 after more than four
years of prior satisfactory service. You served for nearly a
year without disciplinary incident, but on 15 March and again on
18 June 1996, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a
three day period of unauthorized absence, failure to obey. a.
lawful order, making a false official statement, and
disobedience.
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
. by reason of. misconduct. After waiving your procedural rights,
your..commanding officer recommended an honorable discharge by
reason of misconduct. . The discharge authority approved this
“recommendation and directed an honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct, and on 27 June 1936, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such ag -
your prior satisfactory service, post service conduct, and desire
to.change your narrative reason for separation. Nevertheless, .
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
relief in your case because of the seriousness of your repetitive
misconduct, which resulted in two. NUPs and discharge. Further,
you were given an opportunity to defend your actions, but waived
your procedural rights. Finally, Sailors with a record of
misconduct, such as yours, would normally receive a discharge
under other than honorable conditions, and as such, the Board
concluded you were fortunate to have received an honorable
characterization of service.
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7281 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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 | CY2013 | NR7956 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7230 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 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. Subsequently, your commanding officer initiated administrative discharge action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6913 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6082 13
'A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your period of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR345 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 December 2014. The Board noted that you waived the right to an ADB, your best chance for retention or a better characterization of service, and that you were fortunate to have your characterization of service upgraded to general by NDRB, since it was directed that you received an OTH discharge for misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8881 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11993 14
- A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. The BOI found by a vote of three to zero, that you had committed misconduct, and although -the reason was supported by evidence, found that there was not sufficient evidence to recommend your separation from the Navy. The .Board found that the CO’s decision to.impose NJP was based on facts and circumstances surrounding the incident, and that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6323 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7666 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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 error...