DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 8010-07
3 October 2008
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 1 October 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 Navy on 14 July 1999 at age 18 and served
without disciplinary incident.
On 5 May 2003, after complaining of continued anxiousness and
depressive symptoms, you were referred for a mental health
evaluation. You were diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with
mixed anxiety and depressed mood, sleepwalking, a personality
disorder, miscarriage and back problems, routine military
stressors, and occupational problems. As a result you were
recommended for an administrative discharge because of your
unsuitability for further military service. On 8 May 2003 you
submitted a written request for discharge based on the foregoing
diagnoses. On 14 May 2003 this request was approved.
Your record contains a separation performance evaluation in which
you were not recommended for retention or reenlistment due to
being counselled on several occasions because of your
professional, military, and personal deficiencies and your
mental/medical diagnoses. Nonetheless, on 16 May 2003, the
discharge authority directed an honorable discharge by reason of
convenience of the government due to a condition, not a
disability as evidenced by the diagnosed personality and
adjustment disorders. On 30 May 2003 you were so discharged and
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 youth and desire to reenlist. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change
in your reenlistment code. Further, the Board concluded that
your professional, military, and personal deficiencies, as well
as the nonrecommendation for retention or reenlistment were
sufficient to support the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment
code. Finally, such a code is authorized by regulatory guidance
and normally assigned to Sailors who are separated with
disqualifying medical or mental conditions. 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.
Conseguently, 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, ,
Nuk
W. DEAN P FER
Executive \Diréctor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02003-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2008. 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 | 00155-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 2008. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 04718-05
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.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 1 July 1987 at the age of 19 and served for nearly five years without...
NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00236
On this basis, we petition the Board’s relief.In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166 and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to this Applicant’s petition. Essentially, as noted on DD Form 293, this Applicant is requesting that his discharge be upgraded and his narrative reason be changed to Hardship because his in service mental health...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600983.
ND06-00983 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20060725. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was equitable, but not proper (B and C).On 19910625 the Applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder and her discharge was recommended by competent medical authority. The documentation and statements provided by the Applicant were not sufficient to...
NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00234
Applicant is not mentally ill.AXIS I: Adjustment disorder (unspecified) AXIS II: Personality disorder not otherwise specified with Cluster B features. 990412: Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. 990510: Commanding officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general) for the convenience of the government due to a personality disorder, based upon a diagnosed personality disorder as evidenced by psychological evaluation.
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2004-167
CGPC also noted that a civilian psychiatrist did not find that the applicant had a personality disorder. The Coast Guard did not commit an error by discharging the applicant by reason of personality disorder based on the psychiatric report dated December 27, 2002, in which the military psychiatrist determined that the applicant suffered from a personality disorder NOS with narcissistic traits and that he could be discharged if his performance and behavior did not improve. While the Board...
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13006-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2010. However, the Board found these factors were insufficient to warrant changing your reenlistment code due to your diagnosed adjustment disorder. 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 | 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...