Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07459-01
Original file (07459-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

JRE
Docket No: 7459-01
16 September 2002

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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
Your allegations of error and
session, considered your application on 22 August 2002.
injustice were reviewed in accordance  
applicable to the proceedings of this Board,
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your
naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

with administrative regulations and procedures

Documentary material considered by the Board

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

The Board rejected your contention to the effect that the absence of documents establishing a
chain of custody for the results of the blood alcohol testing you underwent on the night you
were injured invalidates those results.
cited by your counsel that a chain of custody be established.
basis for questioning the validity of the tests results obtained in your case. The Board
concluded that the evidence in the report of the line of duty investigation is clear and
convincing that your injuries were incurred as a result of your own misconduct, and therefore
are not ratable.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

It noted that there is no requirement  in the instruction

In addition, the Board had no

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 or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
th% a presumption of regularity attaches to  
important to keep in mind  

all official records.

In this regard, it is

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,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03659-02

    Original file (03659-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record On 30 July 2001 you appealed the NJP based on an investigation into the chain of custody of the urine samples, and a negative analysis of a hair sample you submitted to a private laboratory after the NJP. The Board concurred With regard to your contentions pertaining to the chain of custody of the urine samples, sample, the Board concurred with the remarks in the commanding officer's endorsement of your NJP appeal to the effect there was no chain of custody problem with analysis...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00571-00

    Original file (00571-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    refrigerator first, the other individual who was unable to provide a full sample placed the bottle in the refrigerator after him. stated that you had not used LSD. map" for the commanding officer's use in deciding However, the February 1992 issuance of Navy When it was issued with OPNAVINST The Board concluded that since the CO did not have (NA.VADMIN) "road the appendix was clearly designed to The Board believed that the urinalysis was conducted in accordance with regulations and was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08713-98

    Original file (08713-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The drug laboratory reported on 23 December received.nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 9 February 1998 for You use of cocaine. However, the commanding officer denied your request, noting that the reduction was the result of NJP and the action of the ADB did not overturn a judicial proceeding. 2 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 | CY2001 | 05019-01

    Original file (05019-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your record reflects that on 22 September 1969 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a 25 day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction for 14 days and a seven day forfeiture of pay. On 14 May 1973 you received an On 29 The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, limited education, low test scores, The Board further considered your and Vietnam service. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07108-00

    Original file (07108-00.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. In this connection it substantially concurred with the The Board was not persuaded that the line of duty(LOD)/misconduct determination made in your case is erroneous or unjust. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 02990-04

    Original file (02990-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After your discharge, you were rated as 10% disabled by the Department of Veterans Affairs.In your application you are requesting that the SPD code be changed to “JDG”, which will indicate that you were discharged by reason of parenthood or custody of minor children and your discharge was involuntary. Further, there is no evidence that a discharge by reason of physical disability was warranted. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0916 14

    Original file (NR0916 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 §. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 2013. 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 | 03845-07

    Original file (03845-07.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 enlisted in the Navy on 25 July 2000 at age 19. Because you requested discharge in lieu of trial,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02529-10

    Original file (02529-10.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 December 2010. You submitted a request for a good of the service discharge to avoid trial by court-martial for the period of UA. Your request for discharge was granted and on 27 February 1975, you received an OTH discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03661-02

    Original file (03661-02.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 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 1971, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of duty and were awarded a $40 forfeiture of pay and restriction for seven days. three months, a $300 forfeiture of pay, and a...