DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370.510
0
CRS
Docket No:
15 November 2002
7039-02
Your allegations of error and
A psychiatric evaluation,
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, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 30 October 2002.
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 enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 9
You reported to active duty on 22 July 1964. On
January 1963.
21 January 1965 you convicted by a special court-martial of an
unauthorized absence of 85 days.
conducted on 22 January 1965, diagnosed you with a personality
disorder.
reason of unsuitability due to the diagnosed personality
disorder.
Character of service is based, in part, on one's conduct and
overall traits averages, both of which are computed from marks
Your conduct and overall
assigned during periodic evaluations.
Minimum average marks of 3.0 in
traits averages were both 1.0.
conduct and 2.7 in overall traits were required for a fully
honorable characterization of service at the time of your
separation.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
such as your youth and immaturity
potentially mitigating factors,
On 9 February 1965 you received a general discharge by
and since your conduct
In this regard, no law or military
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
and the contention that you were told that the discharge would be
However, the Board concluded that
upgraded after six months.
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the conviction by court-martial of a
lengthy period of unauthorized absence,
and overall traits averages were insufficiently high to warrant a
fully honorable discharge.
regulation provides for upgrading a discharge based solely on the
passage of time.
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.
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.
You are entitled to have the
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00046-05
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. 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. As requested by reference (a), Mr. petition for award of the Vietnam Service Medal has been reviewed.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03144-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2009. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given your two SPCM convictions, the diagnosed character disorder, and your failure to attain the required average in conduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11622-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval | Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 August 2011. 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9802013
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 June 1999. 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 | 06662-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Minimum average marks of 3.0 in conduct and 2.8 in overall traits were required for a fully honorable characterization of service at the time of your separation. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02596-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 1966, you were separated with a general discharge. 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 | CY2001 | 04486-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 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. 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 | 01073-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2002. Your allegations of error and 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
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 | CY2002 | 08479-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2002. 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. circumstances in your case the Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.