DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
’
TJR
Docket No: 7515-00
26 February 2001
Dear
I‘
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 13 February 2001.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
Board.
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations,
and policies.
Your allegations of error and
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.
The Board found you reenlisted in the Navy on 3 June 1988 after
six years of prior honorable service.
Your record reflects that on 20 January 1989, after undergoing a
medical examination due to suspected alcohol abuse, you were
diagnosed as alcohol dependent and recommended for inpatient
Level III alcohol rehabilitation treatment.
that on 19 May 1989 you completed this treatment.
November 1989, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
drunkenness, drunken/reckless driving, disrespect, assault,
disobedience, and disorderly conduct.
extra duty for 14 days and reduction to
The punishment imposed was
paygrade E-4.
The record reflects
However, on 15
Your record further reflects that on 11 January 1990 you were
notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of
misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and alcohol
abuse rehabilitation failure.
counsel you elected to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB).
general discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
An ADB recommended you be issued a
After consulting with legal
However, the discharge authority disapproved
serious offense and alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.
coxnnanding officer also recommended a general discharge by reason
of misconduct.
these recommendations because of authorized absences (UA) from 28
January to 1 February and from 14 March to 25 April 1990
totalling 14 days.
On 24 May 1990 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM)
of a 40 day period of UA.
forfeiture of pay, confinement for 29 days, and reduction to
paygrade E-2.
months.
A portion of the sentence was suspended for four
You were sentenced to a $761
_-
Your
_
Subsequently, you were again notified of pending
separation action by reason of misconduct due to
serious offense and alcohol abuse rehabilitation
this time you waived your rights to consult with
and to present your case to an ADB or submit a statement in
On 29 May 1990 your commanding
rebuttal to the separation.
officer recommended you be issued an other than honorable
discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense.
On 30 May 1990
and directed an other than honorable discharge.
you began a 21 day period of UA that was not terminated until you
were discharged.
honorable discharge.
The discharge authority approved this recommendation
On 20 June 1990 you received an other than
administrative
commission of a
failure. At
legal counsel
.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your prior honorable service, post service awards, and a
background report from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
The Board further considered your contention of good post service
conduct, which contradicted the information provided by the FBI
report which showed post-service convictions for assault,
malicious injury to property, domestic violence, driving under
the influence, and driving with an open container of an alcoholic
The Board concluded these factors and contentions were
beverage.
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given the serious nature of your frequent misconduct.
the circumstances in your case,
the Board concluded your
discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted:
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
Given all
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,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13619-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 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. On 20 April 1990, the medical department found that you were dependent on alcohol and recommended you receive inpatient Level III...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07906-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2008. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge, and on 25 October 1991 you were so discharged. 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 | 07864-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2008. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5412 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. 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 | NR2510-13
A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2014. You were "80 discharged .On 29 October 1992. , Ce The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially’ mitigating factors, such as your record of service, post service accomplishments, character letters, and desire to upgrade your discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04105-12
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. After waiving your procedural right to consult with legal counsel and to present “your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB), on 3 January 1989, your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09351-07
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 20 April 1987, you enlisted in the Navy at age 22. On 28 December 1990, you had nonjudicial...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 06880-12
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. You were warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00396-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 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. After waiving your procedural right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB}, on 13...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09510-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 2009. 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. On 30 March 1992 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, drug abuse,...