D E P A R T M E N T O F THE N A V Y
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
ELP
Docket No. 580-02
17 May 2002
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 Navy Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
15 May 2002. 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 23 February
1988 for three years. The record reflects that you served
without incident until 30 October 1988 when you were arrested for
driving under the influence (DUI). On 21 November 1988 the
counseling and assistance center (CAAC) advised the commanding
officer (CO) that you were not psychologically dependent on
alcohol, and you were motivated for further productive service.
The CAAC recommended that you be enrolled in the Navy Alcohol and
Drug Safety Action Program and placed on the command's level I
program.
On 20 December 1988 the DUI was dismissed and you pled guilty to
a lesser charge of "wet wreckless." You were sentenced to 90
days in jail, fined $690, and three years of probation. The jail
term was suspended.
You served without further incident until 23 February 1990 when
you were arrested again for DUI. You were again interviewed by
the CAAC, which noted that you had committed two DUI1s in a 16
month period. The CAAC advised the CO that it now appeared that
you were psychologically dependent on alcohol, and recommended
that you be scheduled for treatment at an inpatient
rehabilitation facility.
On 19 July 1990 you were notified that you were being considered
for discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.
You objected to discharge and elected to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). In the enlisted perfor-
mance evaluation for the period 1 December 1989 to 20 July 1990,
you were assigned adverse marks of 1.0 in the rating categories
of "reliabilityw and "personal behavior." You were not recom-
mended for retention or advancement.
Thereafter, the CO recommended that you be disqualified for
submarine duty and decertified from the Personnel Reliability
Program (PRP) , and notified the Navy Central Adjudication
Facility that your security clearance had been withdrawn. You
submitted a rebuttal to the recommendation for decertification
from the PRP, asserting that you were not a security risk and
that your reliability had been strengthened because your drinking
had ceased, and you had been attending Alcohol Anonymous meetings
since February 1990.
On 8 August 1990 you appeared before an ADB with counsel. The
ADB by a 3-0 vote, found that you had committed misconduct due
to the civilian conviction for DUI and commission of a serious
offense by receiving two civil convictions during the current
enlistment, and recommended separation. By a 2-1 vote, the ADB
recommended an honorable discharge. Thereafter, the CO
recommended discharge and stated that you would be afforded
the opportunity to seek treatment through the Veterans
Administration.
The r8ei:ord r e f l e c k s that on 22 August 1990 the C u n u n a n d e r , Naval
Military Personnel Command (CNMPC) approved the recommendation
that you be disqualified for submarine duty by reason of
demonstrated unreliability and directed removal of the enlisted
submarine designator (SS), and stated that you were no longer
entitled to wear the submarine breast insignia. On 28 August
1990, CNMPC directed separation with an honorable discharge by
reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. You were so
discharged on 7 September 2000 and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment
code.
Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
to individuals who are discharged by reason of misconduct due to
civil conviction. Despite your contentions the contrary, removal
of your SS designator was an administrative action and not a
punitive one. Reinstatement of the SS designator falls under the
purview of Commander, Naval Personnel Command and not this Board.
There is no merit to your claim that an ADB was convened only
because you did not have sufficient time remaining on your
enlistment to be sent to alcohol rehabilitation treatment and
were you unwilling to extend the enlistment. The Board could
find no error or injustice in your assigned reenlistment code
since you were treated no differently than others discharged
under similar circumstances. In this regard, an RE-4
reenlistment code must be assigned to an individual discharged by
reason of misconduct. The Board noted that since you discharge
you have worked in the defense industry, for the Peace Corps and
the United Nations; and are currently finishing your doctorate in
economics. However, this does not provide a valid basis for
changing a correctly assigned reenlistment code. The Board
concluded that the reenlistment code was proper and no change is
warranted. 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,
W. DEAN P F E I F F E R
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00801-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 1999. Your record reflects that prior to your reenlistment you had four convictions for driving under the influence (DUI) and had completed in-patient (level 111) alcohol rehabilitation treatment in April 1986. The Board notes that the Navy is very reluctant to discharge an individual with more than 19 years of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06134-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 2001. * You were advanced to RM3 (E-4), extended your enlistment for an additional period of four months, and served without further incident until 15 March 1982, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for use of marijuana. Counsel also noted that the senior member of the ADB was not an 0-4 line officer.
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00325
AIR FORCE DlSCllARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR EE WING, 3RD F1.00H ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002 AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous edition will he used AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL KATIONAIAE CASE NUMBER FD-2(,(,5-0(,325 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. The n~isconduct included leaving his post without authority, failure to obey a lawful order, civil arrest for speeding, driving under the influence of alcohol, dereliction of duty,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05500-00
AEl We reached this conclusion in part because (the CO) submitted a page 13 recording Run convictions and more importantly because (the CO) signed document recorded a second DUI for (the one first class petty officer who he knew had been selected as the Wing Sailor of the Year. mind" or Even (The CO) disregarded Navy policy in frocking (A) to Chief Petty Officer in view of his hit and run convictions. AEl (A)'s Page 13 dated 1 in his microfiche COMNAVAIRPAC take (M) , against...
AF | DRB | CY2004 | FD2004-00014
For the misconduct in paragraphs a and b, you received an Article 15, dated 3 Apr 02. c. You, at or near Francis E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyoming, on or about 13 Feb 02, did fail to obey an order or regulation by visiting an off-base medical provider without first visiting the Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) records office for PRP suspension and a records release form. For this misconduct you received a Letter of Counseling (LOC), dated 23 Jan 02. f. You, at or near Francis E. Warren...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Sep 21 09_17_36 CDT 2000
Further, other individuals stated that you did not notify the command until the third duty day after the arrest. You contend that the arrest was reported on the first day back to work; you were directed not to have any contact with anyone on board the submarine, and therefore could not obtain any witnesses; the executive officer threatened further adverse action if you appealed the NJP; and you were told that you would receive additional alcohol rehabilitation prior to discharge. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00870-01
870-01 24 January 2002 Dear Mr.- 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. considered your application on Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 16 January 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 3...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02305-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 2002. 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. The CO of the DETROIT responded that when you reported on board the RTC letter of 2 June 1986 was noted in your service record, but the ship was...
AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00418
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD-2006-00418 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, change reason and authority and change reenlistment code. Following discharge the applicant successfully completed counseling and is currently an active member of AA. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: a. Enlisted as A1C 17 Sep 90 for 4 yrs.
NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00183
Disposition: Level II (pt currently attending), AA, no antabuse, recommend no lenience if pt has any further ETOH related incidents. No indication of appeal in the record.900730: Former service member notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.900731: Former service member advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear...