DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
						  WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

							TJR
	Docket No: 1621-07
 	5 December 2007

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section J552,

A three--member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2007. 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 7 April 1986 after seven years of prior honorable service. You continued to serve without disciplinary incident until 12 July 1986, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty. The punishment imposed was extra duty and restriction for 15 days, reduction to paygrade E-2. and a $408.45 forfeiture of pay. The paygrade reduction and forfeitures were suspended for six months.

On 22 January 1987 you were hospitalized as a result of an automobile accident in which you were driving while intoxicated. About a month later, on 21 February 1987, you were examined in a hospital emergency room after being assaulted while in town drinking. As a result of the two foregoing alcohol related incidents, on 15 June 1987, you were referred for Level II rehabilitation. However, you stated, in part, that you would rather get out of the Navy than go to treatment. On 7 July 1987
you were counselled regarding your driving while under the influence of alcohol. You were advised that you would be retained, but refusal to participate in Level II rehabilitation could result in an administrative separation by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure. At that time you submitted a written statement in which you refused to participate in Level II or Level III treatment.

On 9 July 1987 you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and did not object to the separation. On 14 July 1987 you received NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty. On 23 July 1987 your commanding officer recommended separation under honorable conditions by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure. The recommendation further stated, in part as follows:

(Member’s) inability to accept his problem and refusal to participate in Level II treatment makes him a liability to the command and the Navy. Extensive counselling and guidance from his seniors has failed to make any progress in making him a useful member of the Navy team. He at times demonstrates a real disrespect for authority and sees no benefit in changing his ways. I feel we have given him a fair chance and the time has come to recognize his continued service will do neither party any good. He did not want to help himself, so I took the opportunity to separate him from the Navy. It was the right action!

On 11 July 1987 the discharge authority approved the separation recommendation, but directed an honorable discharge by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure, and on 23 July 1987 you were so separated and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service and desire to have your reenlistment code changed so that you may reenlist in the Navy. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code because of your repetitive misconduct which resulted in two NJPs and your alcohol rehabilitation failure. Finally, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when a Sailor is separated as a rehabilitation failure. 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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director