Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03556 12
Original file (03556 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490

 

BAN
Docket No: 03556-12
25 March 2013

 

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 20 March 2013. 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 entered active duty in the Navy on 4 January 1978, and served
without disciplinary incident until 24 July 1978, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence
(UA) in excess of 11 days. Shortly thereafter, you received the
following disciplinary actions: on 25 August 1978, you received
NJP for UA; on 31 May 1979, you received NJP for sleeping on
post; on 16 April 1980, you were convicted at a special court-
Martial of UA; on 24 October 1980, you were convicted at a
summary court-martial (SCM) of three specifications of UA and
possessing a false identification card; and on 4 February 1981,
you received a SCM for two specifications of UA. You were
recommended for separation with an other than honorable (OTH)
discharge due to your misconduct. You exercised your right to
consult with counsel and an administrative discharge board (ADB).
Therefore, in May 1981, you received an ADB and it voted to
separate you with an OTH discharge due to misconduct. The
separation authority approved the recommendation, and on 10 July
1981, you were separated with an OTH discharge due to misconduct
and an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
claim of health problems due to possible water contamination at
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina in 1978. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change
to your characterization of service due to your frequent acts of
misconduct. In addition, regarding your claim that you were
exposed to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune, you may contact
the Department of Veterans Affairs to see if you qualify for
treatment. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.

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.
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,

ee: ae ee oe:

ROBERT D. ALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 07189-12

    Original file (07189-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2013. 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 your misconduct that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 11864 11

    Original file (11864 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 2012. 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 | CY2006 | 06405-06

    Original file (06405-06.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.On 7 July 1978 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18, and on 31 October 1978 you received nonjudicial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04217-11

    Original file (04217-11.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 February 2012. 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 | CY2010 | 04222-10

    Original file (04222-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 2011. 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 | CY2013 | NR303 13

    Original file (NR303 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. 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. Administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04701-10

    Original file (04701-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 March 2011. 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 | CY2008 | 00598-08

    Original file (00598-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 2008. 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 | CY2010 | 06982-10

    Original file (06982-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 2011. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your separation code due to your frequent misconduct. 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 | CY2009 | 00200-09

    Original file (00200-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2009. You were recommended for administrative separation due to a pattern of misconduct, and you exercised your right to request an administrative discharge board (ADB). records.