DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No. 09532-10
10 June 2011
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval
record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the 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 9 June
2011. After careful consideration of your application, the Board
concluded that your application was not timely filed, and that it
would not be in the interest of justice to excuse your failure to
submit your application inatimely manner. In this regard, the Board
concluded that you knew at the time of your discharge that you had
an elevated blood alcohol level on 7 November 1992, when you were
injured in a motor vehicle accident. In addition, the Board noted
that although you submitted a record from the Palomar Medical Center
which indicates that the results of a toxicology serect and
urinalysis were negative, you submitted another, undated record
which contains the entry “Blood Alcohol 158". Furthermore, a Palomar
Medical Center discharge summary covering the 7-11 November 1992
period indicates that your blood alcohol level was 158 milligrams
percent when you were admitted there on 7 November 1992. Records
obtained from the Department of Veterans Affairs indicate that you
pleaded guilty toa civilian criminal charge related to driving while
under the influence of alcohol and were sentenced to a significant
period of incarceration for that offense, and that you admitted in
VA claims documents that the accident was alcohol related.
You may request reconsideration of this decision. Your request must
include newly discovered relevant evidence which was not reasonably
available to you when you submitted your application. The evidence
may pertain to the timeliness of your application or to its merits.
Absent such additional evidence, further review of your application
is not possible.
It is regretted that a more favorable reply cannot be made.
Sincerely,
Executive Dilvje
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 03702-04
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 2005. The Board rejected your contention to the effect that a civilian medical record demonstrates that you were not intoxicated when you caused an automobile accident on 7 November 1992. 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 | 07353-10
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 17 March 1992, you received the general discharge for alcohol rehabilitation failure. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020559
The applicant states: * the investigating officer (IO) did not conduct a thorough investigation into the FSM's death * it appears the IO made his decision based on hearsay information told to the police officer at the scene of the accident * the IO stated in his findings that there was no toxicology examination and that is incorrect; additionally, the IO stated he did not interview any witnesses * the police report did not say alcohol was a factor in the accident's cause 3. In this...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00471-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2001. 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 Board believed that a record which includes two nonjudicial punishments, several counseling entries, and an alcohol related incident after...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073985C070403
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be granted retirement under the Army's early retirement authority or that his line of duty determination be changed from not in line of duty to in line of duty. The applicant states that he was involved in an accident at his home on 11 June 2000 and because there was evidence that he "may have been drinking alcohol that evening" a line of duty investigation was initiated. He states that following an investigation the LOD investigating officer...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011774
The cause of the accident had not been determined and substantial evidence did not exist to demonstrate that either intentional misconduct or willful negligence was the proximate cause of the accident. On 17 April 1985, he appealed the determination and entered the following arguments: * He was traveling between 25-30 miles per hour because he knew there was a stop sign ahead * He swerved to the right to avoid hitting a deer * There was no evidence in the police report of excessive speed,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04100060C070208
Counsel states that another witness, SSG V, was interviewed but that the line of duty investigating officer “only touched on the issue of the gold sedan when he interviewed” SSG V. He notes that in SSG V’s sworn statement he related that he was told by Mr. F at the scene of the accident about the involvement of the “gold sedan” in this motor vehicle accident, and thereby corroborated Mr. F’s statement regarding the fact that the woman in the gold car “was speeding so he [applicant] wouldn’t...
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.
CG | BCMR | Alcohol and Drug Cases | 2004-158
On August 1, 2003, the applicant was discharged from the Coast Guard pursuant to Article 12.B.12 of the Coast Guard Personnel Manual. of the Coast Guard Personnel Manual states that the first time a member is involved in an alcohol incident, except those described in Article 20.B.2.f., the commanding officer shall ensure counseling is conducted and recorded on a page 7 entry in the member’s personal data record (PDR), acknowledged by the member, and a copy sent to CGPC. The record...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01155-02
In response to the draft action, on 11 March 1998 you submitted the following statement: I am aware of the consequences of this conviction in both the Naval Service and the Civil System and I accept full responsibility for my actions. On 14 December 1998 the Commander, Training Wing FIVE submitted a final Civil Action Report to Navy Personnel Command that stated, in part, as follows: This is not (LTJG M's; alcohol related incident February 1998 for a DUI offense on 22 July 1997 and...