DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2
NAVY
ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 10210-02
8 September 2003
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 3 September 2003.
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 enlisted in the Navy on 23 June 1978 at age 17.
November 1978 you received nonjudicial punishment
(NJP) for a 17
day period of unauthorized absence
forfeiture of pay and restriction and extra duty for 17 days. On
23 January 1979 you appealed the NJP and the appeal authority
mitigated the punishment by suspending the forfeitures for three
months.
During the period from 4 to 13 November 1979 you were in a UA
status.
referred for a psychiatric evaluation because you were making
threatening telephone calls.
diagnosed with a personality disorder and recommended for
immediate separation.
received NJP for the foregoing 10 day period of UA and were
awarded a $250 forfeiture of pay.
Subsequently, you were notified of pending separation action by
reason of unsuitability due to the diagnosed personality
disorder.
Shortly thereafter, on 19 November 1979, you were
Two days later, on 21 November 1979, you
At that time you
,waived your right to consult with
After the evaluation, you were
On 17
(UA) and were awarded a $200
On 13 December 1979 you were
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
NJPs and since your conduct
Your conduct average was 2.7.
Your commanding officer recommended separation by
and on 7 December 1979 the discharge
legal counsel and to submit a statement in rebuttal to the
separation.
reason of unsuitability,
authority directed separation with the type of discharge
warranted by your service record.
issued a general discharge by reason of unsuitability.
Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and overall
trait averages which are computed from marks assigned during
periodic evaluations.
An average
of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for
a fully honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity,
the diagnosed personality disorder,
and post service conduct.
Nevertheless,
the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of the two
average was insufficiently high to warrant an honorable
discharge.
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.
Executive
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09527-08
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. Board. 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 | 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02838-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TJIR Docket No: 2838-07 24 January 2008 A three-member panel of the Boa Records, sitting in executive session, application on 23 January 2008. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative rd for Correction of Naval considered your Your allegations of error and regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Subsequently, you were notified of pending...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06503-09
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. However, this recommendation was changed to general under honorable conditions by reason of unsuitability solely because of your psychiatric diagnosis of a character disorder. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10415-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 2003. separation by reason of unsuitability, stating in part, that further retention in the service would not be in the best interest of the Navy. 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 | 00297-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 2010. 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 HOLLEIES . 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 | CY2014 | NR4500 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. Five months later, on 11 July 1978, you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of UA totaling 78 days, and was sentenced to a $530 forfeiture of pay, reduction in pay grade, confinement for two months and a suspended bad conduct discharge (BCD). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3862-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2014. 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 found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given the seriousness...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR04500 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07567-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 2009. Furthermore, disciplinary action and an administrative separation are appropriate for alcohol related offenses. 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.