Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01531-10
Original file (01531-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TUR
Docket No: 1531-10
20 October 2010

 

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 October 2010. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

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 on 19 July 1984 at age 18 and
served for a year without disciplinary incident, but on 13 August
1985 you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a two day
period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded extra duty
and restriction for 14 days and a $300 forfeiture of pay.

In January 1986, after undergoing a psychiatric evaluation, you
were diagnosed with an immature personality disorder and an
adjustment disorder. You were also recommended for an
expeditious administrative separation. On 24 January 1986 you
received a letter of warning regarding deficiencies in your
performance, specifically, failure to go to your appointed place
of duty, being placed on weight control, poor judgment and
immaturity, a lengthy period of UA, and being diagnosed with
personality and adjustment disorders. You were warned that any
further deficiencies in your performance could result in an
administrative separation and disciplinary action. On 28 January
1986 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 24
day period of UA and sentenced to a $960 forfeiture of pay,
reduction to paygrade E-1, and confinement at hard labor for 30

days.

In February 1986 you were processed for an administrative
separation by reason of convenience of the government due to a
condition, not a physical disability as evidenced by your
diagnosed personality disorder. Your commanding officer
recommended a general discharge stating in part, that your
disciplinary record of: NUP, SPCM, and UA were also taken into
‘consideration, Subsequently, the discharge authority approved
this recommendation and directed discharge under honorable
tonditions, and on 13 March 1986, you were issued a general

discharge.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, and desire to upgrade your
discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your misconduct which resulted in
NJP and SPCM and your diagnosed personality and adjustment
disorders which resulted in your incompatibility with military
service. Accordingly, your application has been denied.

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,

\adroe Shep!

W. DEAN PF
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10773-09

    Original file (10773-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted two to one in favor of an under other than honorable discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00965-09

    Original file (00965-09.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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to change the reason for your discharge given your SPCM conviction for a period of UA that lasted over three months, the diagnosed personality disorder that stated, in part, that you were a danger to others, and NUP...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04065-09

    Original file (04065-09.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. Subsequently, the foregoing offenses were referred for court- martial. On 31 March 1986 you submitted a. written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the four periods of UA totalling 29 days.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3862-13

    Original file (NR3862-13.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 March 2014. 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given the seriousness...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00941-10

    Original file (00941-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 25 July 2001. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your RE-4 reenlistment code given your NUP and diagnosed adjustment disorder. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10625-06

    Original file (10625-06.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.On 6 September 1984 you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 19. On 9 July 1985 you were counseled...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08244-98

    Original file (08244-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 September 1989 you were diagnosed with a severe borderline personality disorder which existed prior to enlistment (EPTE) and alcohol abuse. Further, the Board noted that even though you had been warned of Given an administrative separation, the Board concluded that your all the circumstances of your case, discharge, narrative reason for separation, and reenlistment code were proper and no change is warranted. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03093-08

    Original file (03093-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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. On 11 September 1970, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed discharge by reason of unsuitability, and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07736-07

    Original file (07736-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel off the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2008. Your record also reflects a five hour period of absence from your appointed place of duty and 12 periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 49 days during the period from 14 June 1979 to 10 April 1981. ying for a correction of an official naval n the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12857-09

    Original file (12857-09.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. On 9 November 1994, you received your second NUP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 30 days and a $388 forfeiture of pay, which was suspended for six months. In this regard, the Board determined that a personal...