DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMS
Docket No: 2599-08
20 November 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
19 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to
establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
On 12 April 1965, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17 with
parental consent and were assigned to Platoon 120. On 7 May 1965,
you were assigned to the Physical Training Unit, and then to Platoon
131. On 17 June 1965, you were removed from Platoon 131 because of
disobedience of an order and assigned to the Casual Battalion. On
1 July 1965, your commanding officer initiated administrative
separation by reason of unsuitability and recommended a general
discharge due to your uncooperative attitude and lack of motivation.
On 6 July 1965, a medical evaluation stated that your initial
psychiatric screening indicated that you appeared to be passive
aggressive and further stated that you had a history of passive and
aggressive reaction. The evaluation concluded by recommending
discharge. On 6 July 1965, you made a personal appearance before a
Depot Aptitude Board (DAB) during which you acknowledged that you
understood why you were before the DAB and refused to answer or
ignored most of the questions. The DAB recommended a general
discharge by reason of unsuitability because of your unwillingness to
return to training and failure to apply yourself to the best of your
ability. On 9 July 1965, you were separated with a general discharge
by reason of unsuitability.
Characterization of service is determined by a service member's
conduct, actions, performance of duty, and proficiency and conduct
marks assigned on a periodic basis. Minimum acceptable proficiency
and conduct marks of 3.8 and 4.0, respectively, were required to form
the basis for a fully honorable characterization of service.
Although there are no proficiency and conduct marks currently
contained in the record, it appears that your commanding officer and
DAB found that your service warranted a general characterization of
service.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth and
honorable period of service in the Army. The Board also considered
your contention of being abused by a drill instructor. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge due to your performance at
recruit training and the DAB's determination that your service
warranted a general characterization of service. Regarding your
contention, there is no evidence in the record to support it and the
news article that you provided does not apply to your case.
Therefore, the Board concluded that the discharge was proper as
issued and no change is warranted. 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, 1
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02013-08
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 | CY2006 | 05469-06
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 19 September 1974 at age 18. Subsequently, the discharge authority...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09825-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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. The Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your disciplinary record...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07825-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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. The Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your disciplinary record...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04246-07
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.On 7 December 1970, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17 with parental consent. Although no...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04653-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, togethér with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 10 January 1966, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of unsuitability, and recommended a general...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05670-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application.on 15 April 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08155-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2008. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire to have your discharge upgraded to honorable. 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 | CY1999 | 05486-99
Reenlistme On 31 OCT 64, Review of medical record reveals initial normal physical exam The patient presented with complaints of anxiety on 4. on 15 MAR 62. His active duty behavior (related to what and The tremor, would now be diagnosed as a personality disorder). has been diagnosed as an initially felt to be related to anxiety, Therefore, I essential tremor and th recommend that former character of the discharge to request for change of the "medical" be denied.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03817-02
your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. An average The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity and you contention that you should never have enlisted in the Navy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...