Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06746-07
Original file (06746-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


SJN
                                                                                          Docket No: 06746-07
10 June 2008




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 4 June 2008. 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 Marine Corps on 29 November 1972 at age 17. On 9 and 30 April 1973, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for sleeping on post and not shaving for an inspection.

On 3 June 1973, you were diagnosed with a passive dependent personality and mental retardation. It was discovered that you had stated that you had no history of mental or nervous disorders prior to entering the service. However, it was found that you had undergone long-term care in a state mental hospital prior to enlistment. It was recommended that you receive a general discharge due to unsuitability. On 10 September 1973, you received a third NJP for six days of unauthorized absence.




Based on the mental health evaluation, your commanding officer (CO)
processed you for an undesirable discharge due to misconduct
(fraudulent enlistment) . You waived your rights to consult counsel,
submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative
discharge board. On 13 September 1973, your CO forwarded his
recommendation for separation, stating in part, that your performance,
attitude, and aptitude had been substandard, that you suffered greatly from mental disorders, and that it had affected your conduct. On 6 November 1973, the discharge authority directed that you receive an undesirable discharge due to misconduct (fraudulent enlistment) . You received an undesirable discharge on 20 November 1973.
At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. However, on 3 November 1975 the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB) found that you did not knowingly enter into a fraudulent enlistment due to your mental conditions, and changed your characterization of service to a general discharge in the best interest of the service.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire to serve in Vietnam at that time. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the reason for your discharge given the medical diagnoses, any further change in your character of service, or changing your reenlistment code given your record of three NJP’s and substandard performance. With regard to your RE-4 reenlistment code, it is required when an individual is not recommended for retention or reenlistment. 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 PFIEFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08125-01

    Original file (08125-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 12 April 1973 you received NJP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, disobedience, and a five day period of UA. November 1976, you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 07727-11

    Original file (07727-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considere@a your -application on 2 August 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07974-97

    Original file (07974-97.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 1993. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. After an evaluation, the diagnosis was personality." The Board also noted the comments by the CO in which he stated that you attempted suicide in 1987 and again in 1990, and on 16 April 1992 you stated that you were going to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01114-09

    Original file (01114-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late brother’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 20 September 1974, your CO recommended that you be discharged for misconduct due to fraudulent enlistment with an undesirable discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2518-13

    Original file (NR2518-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate reentry code based on your circumstances.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02070-08

    Original file (02070-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change of your reenlistment code because of the severity of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00562-05

    Original file (00562-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 December 2004 the discharge authority directed an uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of fraudulent entry due to alcohol abuse. On 22 December 2004 you were so separated from the Navy, and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. 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 | CY2006 | 03691-06

    Original file (03691-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 fo d the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 16 May 2002 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident.On 3 June...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00360-01

    Original file (00360-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    evidence in available medical records that you were referred for psychiatric evaluation. On 26 August 1980 the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) denied your request for recharacterization of your discharge. The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and contentions were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of four NJPs and the serious nature of the charges of which you were convicted by civil authorities.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000451

    Original file (ND1000451.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s separation did not warrant the right to elect an administrative hearing board.The Applicant was recommended for administrative separation pursuant to Article 1910-134 of the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN), Separation by Reason of Defective Enlistment and Induction - Fraudulent Entry Into the Naval Service. The Applicant was seen by a medical officer and evaluated for enlistment; the Medical Officer’s report, and the Applicant’s provided medical background...