DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJIR
Docket No: 3038-10
26 January 2011
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, 7itting in executive session, considered your
application on 25 January 2011. 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, 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.
You reenlisted in the Navy on 18 December 1992 after nearly 11
years of prior honorable service. During this period, you
underwent a series of evaluations for your pre-service medical
condition, specifically, Hodgkin's disease. You were also
diagnosed with major depression, cocaine and alcohol dependence,
and a narcissistic personality disorder.
You continued to serve without disciplinary infraction. until 21
May 1993, when you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) .
On 28 June 1993, while in a UA status, you were apprehended by
civil authorities and charged with assault with a deadly weapon
(battery). However, the following day, you were returned to
military custody, thus terminating a 38 day period of UA. Less
than a month later, on 19 July 1993, you began a 17 day period of
UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended by civil
authorities on 6 August 1993.
On 23 January 1994 you were again apprehended by civil
authorities after forcing your spouse, at gun point, to take you
to a store to cash a $30 check. Subsequently, you were returned
to military custody. On 31 January 1994 a Navy drug laboratory
reported that your urine sample tested positive for cocaine. On
22 November 1994 you were notified of pending administrative
separation processing by reason of misconduct due to commission
of a serious offense, specifically, kidnapping; and drug abuse.
After consulting with legal counsel, you elected to present your
case to an administraté#ve Gischarge board (ADB). On 5 December
1994 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable
conditions by reaton of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense and drug abuse.
On 14 February 1995 your commanding officer also recommended
discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct. This recommendation stated, in part, as follows:
(Member) has been arrested for conspiracy to steal,
assault, carrying a concealed weapon, kidnapping, robbery,
and resisting arrest. He was pending a general court-
martial for the foregoing offenses and possession of drug
paraphernalia, purchasing and using cocaine, and
unauthorized absences. Because of his medical condition,
the charges were withdrawn and he was referred to an ADB for
administrative processing.
As a result of the foregoing, the discharge authority approved
these recommendations and directed your commanding officer to
issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct, and on 7 April 1995, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your period of satisfactory service, medical conditions, and
desire to upgrade your discharge. It also considered your
assertions that you did not receive adequate counsel and that you
suffered from a severe mental illness and post traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD). Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive drug and
alcohol related misconduct in both the civilian and military
communities. Further, there is no evidence in the record, and
you submitted none, to support your assertions. Finally, even if
a mental illness or PTSD existed at the time of your service,
such conditions do not excuse your serious misconduct, so you
were responsible for your actions. Accordingly, your application
has been denied.
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,
loans
W. DEAN PFE
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06140-10
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 9 July 1975 you began another period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended and held in custody by Civil authorities on 3 November 1975. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR621 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2015. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR621 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2015 . 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 pclicies. After applying these guidelines to the evidence in the case, the Board was not able to substantiate the existence o= PTSD in your case .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06072-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08042-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 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. 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 | CY2012 | 10246 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 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. Your record contains correspondence from the Bureau of Naval Personnel dated 13 July 1994 which states, in part, that the DD Form 553 (mark of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07743-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval re ord, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. At Ithat time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel an to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB)| On 15 April...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00917-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2008. 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 5 December 1975 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to conviction by civil authorities.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6050 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2014. On 5 January 1995, thé discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on 13 January 1995, you were so discharged!’ 2° 2 0 ss oo The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your...
NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00325
In 1995 (applicant) went to the Mental Health Clinic in Joshua Tree, CA and was diagnosed as mentally and physically disabled. Came to my attention in December 1992 when a lymph node biopsied from the right neck showed Hodgkin's Disease once again. He was arrested by civilian authority for public intoxication and resisting arrest.950314: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.