DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 10461-10
16 September 2011
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 September 2011. 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 Navy on 27 August 1974 at age 17 and served
without disciplinary infraction until 24 September 1975, when you
began a four day period of unauthorized absence (UA) that. was not
terminated until 28 September 1975. Your record does not reflect
the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this misconduct.
On 7 and 10 October 1975, after undergoing psychiatric
evaluations for the foregoing period of UA, inaptitude, insomnia,
and accident profieness, you were treated for depression and found
to be unfit for submarine duty. The psychiatric report stated,
in part, that ‘you went UA due to a fear of wanting to hurt
someone and/or destroy some equipment during moments of violence,
had a history of medical problems, and were a significant medical
and psychiatric risk. Presumably, you were recommended for an
expeditious administrative separation. Subsequently, you were
processed for an administrative separation by reason of
convenience of the government. The discharge authority directed
discharge under honorable conditions, and on 19 December 1975,
you were issued a general discharge.
The Board, in its review of your record, although incomplete, and
application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating
factors, such as your youth and desire to upgrade your discharge.
It also considered your assertions of being with the wrong crowd,
smoking marijuana, and fear of being labeled a security risk and
confinement. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge. 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,
\p Maa Pp
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06140-10
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 9 July 1975 you began another period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended and held in custody by Civil authorities on 3 November 1975. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01165-11
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Your record, however, does not reflect the court action or sentence for the foregoing charge. 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 | CY2011 | 00440-11
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07446-98
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 January 1992 the discharge authority directed an On 7 February 1992 you were so discharged The Board also considered your performance The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your honorable service...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02070-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change of your reenlistment code because of the severity of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4927 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 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. On 18 January 1980, you received the general discharge (unsuitability-personality disorder), and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01866-11
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, these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your lengthy period of UA from ‘the Marine Corps. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08508-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06503-09
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. However, this recommendation was changed to general under honorable conditions by reason of unsuitability solely because of your psychiatric diagnosis of a character disorder. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05656-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 2011. 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 . Cofisequently, wher applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden, is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...