DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TRG
Docket No: 7334-00
26 June 2001
Dear Mien
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 19 June 2001. 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 19 July 1995.
At that time you had completed about two years of active duty on
a prior enlistment. The record shows that you received
nonjudicial punishment on 1 June 1998 for disobedience. The
performance evaluation for the period 20 August 1998 to 15 June
1999 is adverse because of a mark of 1.0 in military
bearing/character. This mark was assigned because you had failed
the physical readiness test.
The documentation to support discharge processing is not filed in
your service record, and you have informed the examiner assigned
to your case that you do not have a copy of the documentation and
it is not available at your command. You have provided a copy of
the commanding officer's directive that you be discharged for the
convenience of the government due to a personality disorder. The
performance evaluation for the period 16 June 1999 to 5 May 2000
states that you were not recommendations for retention. The
evaluation comments state, in part, as follows:
(He) has become an administrative burden due to his
inability to resolve ongoing personal problems. The
command has had to intervene in his personal life on
numerous occasions. He completed required Family
Services Center counseling sessions and behavior work
shops, but continues to have problems.
You were honorably discharged on 5 May 2000 by reason of
convenience of the government due to a diagnosed personality
disorder. At that time you acknowledged that you were not
eligible for reenlistment and had been assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code because of the diagnosed personality disorder.
You state in your application that the command became tired of
your wife calling base security every time you had an argument,
and forced you out of the Navy by referring you to a psychologist
who, after you filled out a 600 question survey, diagnosed you
with a personality disorder and recommended your discharge. In
support your application you have submitted a psychiatric
evaluation from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) which
diagnosed you with major depression with anxiety features, but
not with a personality disorder.
The Board noted your statement that you were seen by a
psychologist, given psychiatric testing, and were diagnosed with
a personality disorder. The Board also noted that you have been
diagnosed with depression by the DVA. However, the DVA did not
review the psychiatric evaluation done by the Navy and did not
refute the determination that you had a personality disorder that
warranted discharge. The Board concluded that the discharge
processing was conducted in accordance with regulations and you
were properly discharged on 5 May 2000.
Regulations allow for the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
when an individual is discharged because of a diagnosed
personality disorder. The Board concluded that a record, which
included a disciplinary action and adverse performance
evaluations was sufficient to support the assignment of the RE-4
reenlistment code. The Board also concluded that this code would
be appropriate even if your problem was more accurately diagnosed
as a major depression and not a personality disorder.
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07614-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 May 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. 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 | CY2008 | 03523-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 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. In this regard, you were assigned the most favorable reenlistment code for your situation.
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500501
ND05-00501 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050131. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge changed to honorable. 001208: Applicant discharged, DD-214 issued.001227: Commanding Officer reported discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder of such severity as to render the Applicant incapable of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08655-00
Petitioner was impatient with Med Hold and the Mental Health Department, stating once more that he felt the Navy was the cause of his psychological problems. Diagnosed with “Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood (resolved); Marital Problem; Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified, with Antisocial and Narcissistic traits psychiatrically fit for full duty and accountable/responsible for his actions. In the petitioner ’s letter requesting a change in status of his discharge, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08665-00
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF 2 NAVY ANNE NA’JAL RECORD X S WASHINGTON DC 20370.510 0 TJR Docket No: 8665-00 11 June 2001 This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. applicatilon for correction of your A three-member panel of the Board for Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 June 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance regulations and procedures applicable to the...
NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00729
“On behalf of the above referenced applicant, and in accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166; SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the following informal comments; and/or issue(s). Evaluation done by Dr. N_ who recommended pt be administratively separated from the Navy. It is possible that due to her adjustment disorder or depressive disorder NOS triggered by occupational stress, that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04916-01
A psychiatric evaluation in the record states that you were referred by the chaplain for depression, frequent crying, inability to adapt to military life, anger, anxiety, and problems with your family and girlfriend. facts alleged at the time including the alcohol abuse, breaking mirrors, and general unhappiness were fictional and designed to create a picture of distress. He appears have an understanding of the reality Clinical evidence However, pre- The Board noted that the diagnosed...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08086-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 October 2007. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regu1atio~ 5 and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 08518-04
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2005. This man shows evidence of an antisocial personality disorder of moderate severity which existed prior to enlistment, and certainly makes him unsuitable for continued Naval Service. Minimum average marks of 3.0 in conduct and 2.7 in overall traits were required for a fully honorable characterization of service at the time of your separation.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02469-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 1999. The record reflects that on 30 June 1998 you were referred to a mental health unit because of suicidal ideation, inability to tolerate authority, and a prior undisclosed history of psychiatric treatment. Separation by erroneous entry is authorized when an enlistment would not have occurred if a disqualifying factor had been known prior to enlistment.