Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00135-10
Original file (00135-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

SIN
Docket No: 00135-10
12 October 2010

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 5 October 2010. 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 Or
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 and began a period of active duty on

2 April 1982. The Board found that you were convicted by summary
court-martial (SCM) of three specifications of larceny,
housebreaking, obstruction of justice, and property damage. On
29 September 1983, you were medically evaluated and diagnosed
with a personality disorder. Subsequently, administrative
discharge action was initiated by reason of convenience of the
government as evidenced by the diagnosed personality disorder.
However, when your case was forwarded to the separation authority
(SA), reprocessing was directed due to a personality disorder and
misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. You elected
to consult counsel and have your case heard before an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 24 February 1984, the
ADB unanimously recommended that you be separated with an other
than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of misconduct. Your
commanding officer concurred with the ADB’s findings and
recommendation, and forwarded his recommendation that you be
discharged for misconduct. On 11 September 1984, you were so
discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service and contention that you were recommended for a
convenience of the government discharge due to a personality
disorder, but received an OTH discharge. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your SCM conviction
for very serious offenses. With regard to your contention, the
Beard noted that the administrative separation process includes
tite requirement that commands process service members for all
yeasons for which minimum criteria are met. This enabled the SA
to approve discharge for the most appropriate reason. The SA may
approve the most appropriate reason for separation, direct
reprocessing when a command fails to process members for all
reasons, aS in your case. In this regard, although you were
notified that you your being administratively separated due to a
personality disorder, the SA directed that you be reprocessed due
to a personality disorder and misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense. Finally, separation for misconduct normally
takes precedence over all other reasons for discharge.
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,

\\ wv
W. DE
Executive tor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00150-10

    Original file (00150-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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 policies. The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of service and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04122-08

    Original file (04122-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. On 8 June 1985, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct due...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11124-07

    Original file (11124-07.pdf) 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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02644-09

    Original file (02644-09.pdf) 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 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 | CY2001 | 07253-01

    Original file (07253-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2002. However, on 18 January 1985, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to administratively reprocess you for separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and commission of a serious offense, and to afford you the right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 4 March 1985 an ADB recommended you be...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02610-08

    Original file (02610-08.pdf) 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 found that 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00549

    Original file (ND02-00549.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Disposition: Service member is strongly recommended for administrative separation on the basis of documented personality disorder, sleepwalking disorder and pes planus, and much more so with his suicidal behavior. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): It has been recommended that the Respondent, SA (Applicant), be separated from the Naval Service by reason of convenience of the government - personality disorder and misconduct - commission of a serious offense - malingering and that the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04498-08

    Original file (04498-08.pdf) 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. On 2 October 1985, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. The Board also noted that your case was initially heard by an ADB, which recommended a general discharge, but that action was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00735-03

    Original file (00735-03.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 June 2003. 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. unanimously...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09292-04

    Original file (09292-04.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 found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 24 October 1980 at age 18. However, on 19 December 1984, the discharge...