DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 833-10
26 October 2010
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 1060 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 20 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 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 and began a period of active
duty on 17 August 1961, at age 18. On 19 October 1961, you were
convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of assault. On 15
August 1962, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
insubordinate conduct toward a superior noncommissioned officer.
On 9 August 1963, you were convicted by SCM’ of failure to go to
your appointed place of duty and insubordinate conduct toward a
superior noncommissioned officer. On 8 November 1963, you were
convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of insubordinate
conduct toward a noncommissioned officer. On 6 February 1964,
you were the subject of a psychiatric evaluation that diagnosed
you with a borderline personality disorder, functioning as a
severe schizoid with fragile controls, and having the potential
for psychotic decompensation if subjected to further stress. You
were notified of pending administrative separation action by
reason of unsuitability due to the diagnosed personality
disorder. You were afforded all of you procedural rights
including the opportunity to submit a statement on your behalt.
On 27 February 1964, the separation authority approved the
separation under honorable conditions. On 16 January 1970 you
were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your
characterization of service given the seriousness of your
misconduct. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
$%. . regré&tet 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
wevidence 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 P¥
Executive Dilrécho
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05279-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 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. On 27 October 1969, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of unsuitability due to the diagnosed personality disorder.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03505-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02609-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 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. On 10 October 1962, you received NJP for UA from your unit.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00058-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 2010. On 3 February 1956, you were convicted by general court martial (GCM) of assault with a dangerous weapon, insubordinate conduct toward a noncommissioned officer, threatening to kill and failure to obey a lawful order. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01596-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 November 2009. 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. 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 | CY2009 | 11385-09
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. You received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions for failure to go to your appointed place of duty and unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period of four days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02838-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TJIR Docket No: 2838-07 24 January 2008 A three-member panel of the Boa Records, sitting in executive session, application on 23 January 2008. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative rd for Correction of Naval considered your Your allegations of error and regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Subsequently, you were notified of pending...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05234-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07898-09
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient injustice. 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 | 01386-10
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 24 February 1970 you were So discharged. 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.