DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUIR
Docket No: 11124-07
14 November 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 13 November 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 22 July 1987 at age 17. About a year
and five months later, during the period from 8 to 20 December
1988, you were referred for a psychiatric evaluation because of
your suicidal ideation and complaint of feeling pain for nearly
Six months. You reported a history of physical violence,
impoverished social relations, multiple fights and truancies,
impulsive and nonlethal self-harm, cruelty to animals, chronic
unhappiness, and suicidal ideation. You were diagnosed with a
personality disorder with antisocial borderline and avoidant
traits and recommended for an expeditious administrative
separation. On 28 December 1988 you received nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) for a four day period of unauthorized absence
(UA) and missing the movement of your ship.
On 9 January 1989 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
_ Serious offense. At that time you waived your right to consult
with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). However, your commanding officer was
directed to reprocess you for separation because there was an
error in the original processing procedures. Accordingly, on 27
February 1989, you were again notified of pending administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense, and again you waived your right to consult with legal
counsel and to present your case to an ADB. On 3 March 1989 your
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of
a serious offense. On 24 March 1989 the discharge authority
approved this recommendation and directed discharge under other
than honorable conditions. However, on 5 April 1989 you were
issued a general discharge by reason of other physical/mental
condition due to personality disorder 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 upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct
and diagnosed personality disorder. Finally, the Board noted
that you were erroneously issued a general discharge when in all
actuality you were processed for discharge under other than
honorable conditions. As such, you were fortunate to have
received a general discharge certificate. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02782-06
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 1 April 1987 after three years of prior honorable service. You were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11360-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your _application on 9 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. On 29 October 1991 an ADB recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06248-01
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. On 27 January 1988 you received NJP for wrongful consumption of alcohol beverages as a minor and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 14 days and reduction to paygrade E-l. On 3 February 1988 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02315-09
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. On 25 May 1993 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by the two periods of UA totalling 66 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02644-09
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, 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 waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06745-06
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 28 April 1988 at age 18. On 22 June 1989 you were diagnosed with a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08556-05
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) , Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the United States Navy, applied to this Board requesting a general discharge vice the other than honorable discharge issued on 10 October 1989.2. Although Petitioner’s application was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and review the application on its merits.c. Officers with special court-martial convening authority such as the CO only had...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07927-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2011. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | 00033-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 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 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 | CY2009 | 09970-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. The Naval Discharge Review Board denied your request for upgrade of your discharge on or about 4 February 2000. 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.