DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

Docket No: 8567-17/                               
           4748-16            
Ref: Signature date 


This is in reference to your latest reconsideration request dated 5 September 2017.  You previously petitioned the Board on six previous occasions and were advised in our letters that your applications had been disapproved.  Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board of Correction of Naval Records procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Secretary of the Army, 335 F.Supp.2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004).  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, your application has been denied. 

Because your application was submitted with new evidence not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your application. Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 19 February 2019.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

You presented as evidence a personal statement, NAVPERSCOM Inst 4520.1, MCO P6100.12 w/cha1, BN Order 6100.2, 
                      letter, a 1984 Calendar, a disciplinary action sheet,               an annual audit sheet, and              and                  request for information letters, and other evidence previously reviewed by the board.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined that the documentation that you provided, even though not previously considered by the Board, was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.   

In regard to your contentions that you received an Other Than Honorable (OTH) discharge after being falsely accused of not being at your appointed place of duty on two separate occasions for a program you were never assigned, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence contrary to your contentions.  The record shows that prior to being notified of administrative separation, you received four non-judicial punishments (NJP) on four separate occasions during the period from 15 March 1983 to 8 June 1984.  The Board noted that one of the NJP was for the failure to go that place of duty. Your previous statements include that you volunteered for the remedial training, and having volunteered, you did not think attendance was required.
The Board also noted that you requested an administrative discharge board (ADB) which found you committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and recommended you for an OTH discharge. 

In regard to your request to expunge the injury in an alcohol related fight from your record, the Board noted that there is no new evidence in your record, and you submitted none that this entry was made in error.  In regard to your request the Board remove the diagnosis that you were an alcohol abuser noted that there is no new evidence in your record, and you submitted none that this entry was made in error.  In regard to your contention that you were not given the required education/treatment or treatment necessary, there is no new evidence in your record, and you submitted none for review. 

In regard to your contentions that this Board disregarded the rule of law, rules of evidence, and failed to elaborate or provide a reasoning for their denial, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contentions.  

It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable action cannot be taken again.  You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters.  New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board.  In the absence of sufficient new matters for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 

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,

 
5/14/2019