DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
cord pursuant to the provisions of title LO Of the
EL
al re
United States Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Ss sitting in executive session, considered your
on on 11 May 2010. Your allegations of error and
were reviewed in accordance with administrative
e jons and procedures applicable to the proceedings of
this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board
consisted of your oan together with all materi
su
c
Q >
x
bmitted in support thereof, your naval record and ap
atutes, regulations and policies
after careful and conscient ious consideration of the ae
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted w
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
‘
error or injustice. The Board cound that you reenlisted in the
Navy on 23 November 1988. You received a civil conviction for
malicious mischief and assault. You received nonjudicial
punishment on four occasions for six specifications of
unauthorized absence total ing more than four days and four
specifications of failure to obey lawful orders. ian your
Civil conviction, you were counseled four times regarding
misconduct and warned that future offenses could result in
administrative separation action. On 14
May 1990, you refused
alcohol abuse rehabilitation. You were notified that your
commanding officer was recommending you for administrative
separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for
misconduct - commission of a serious offense and alcohol
rehabilitation failure. You elected to have your case heard by
an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 12 September 1990,
the ADB met and unanimously found that you committed a serious
offense, failed alcohol rehabilitation, and recommended that
you be separated with a general discharge. On 13 November
1990, you received a general discharge for misconduct —-
commission of a serious offense, and were assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, and
prior honorable service. However, the Board concluded that
your general discharge should not be changed due to your
misconduct. You are advised that no discharge is automatically
upgraded due merely to the passage of time. The Board found
that you were fortunate to have received a general discharge,
since most individuals separated for misconduct receive other
than honorable discharges. In view of the above, 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 oLipeval
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,
Ret
ROBERT D. SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07515-00
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. 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...
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 | CY2008 | 10351-08
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. On 30 October 1990 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue an other...
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 | CY2010 | 02173-10
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 6 May 1992 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and alcohol rehabilitation failure. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
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 | CY2002 | 00580-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2002. The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 23 February 1988 for three years. 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.
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 | CY2012 | 01582 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 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 | 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.