DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 945-18 Ref: Signature date Dear : This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. 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. 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 22 March 2019. 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, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 23 July 1981. During the period from 8 July to 8 December 1983, you received three nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for failing to be at your appointed place of duty (rifle range), use of disrespectful language, two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 17 days, and disobeying a lawful order to get a haircut. Based on your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), it appears you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you would have conferred with a qualified military lawyer, be advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. Subsequently, it also appears your request for discharge was granted because on 2 April 1984, you received an OTH discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to have your discharge upgraded, as well as your contentions that you have had Alzheimer’s disease since 2000, dementia, and exposure to toxic drinking water at caused neuro behavior problems. The Board also considered your assertion that the discharge you agreed to would automatically be upgraded after a period of time. The Board concluded these factors and assertion were not sufficient to warrant an upgrade of your discharge given your misconduct which resulted in three NJP’s, the referral of charges to a court-martial, and what appears to be, your request for discharge. The Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when, what appears, your request for discharge was approved. Your original service record was incomplete and did not contain any documentation pertaining to your request for an OTH discharge in lieu of court-martial. Absent of such evidence, the Board relied upon the presumption of regularity and presumed that the officials acted in accordance with governing law/policy and in good faith. With regard to your assertion of an automatic upgraded of your characterization of service, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations regard to your claim of being exposed to toxic drinking water at the Board noted that Public Law 112-154, Honoring America's Veterans and Caring for Act of 2012, requires the Veterans Administration to provide health care to Veterans with one or more of 15 specified illnesses or conditions. You should contact the nearest office of the Department of Veterans Affairs concerning your right to apply for benefits or appeal an earlier unfavorable determination. 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 matters. New matters are those not previously presented to or 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, 5/15/2019