DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No. 05838-09
li December 2009
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 10 December 2009. 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.
error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 21 March 1994
at age 31. It appears that your enlistment was fraudulent, in
that you concealed your long history of cocaine abuse which
began at age 18, an arrest for possession of cocaine, a history
of in-patient drug rehabilitation treatment. You completed a
Report of Medical History on 12 December 1994 in which you
denied having a history of frequent trouble sleeping, depression
or excessive worry and nervous trouble of any sort. You
underwent a pre-separation physical examination on that date and
were found qualified for separation. You were convicted by
special court-martialon 6 February 1995 of two periods of
unauthorized absence and wrongful use of a controlled substance.
You were sentenced to be confined for ninety day, to forfeit
$500.00 pay per month for three months, and to be separated from
the service with a bad conduct discharge. You were so discharged
on 1 February 1996, upon the completion of the appellate review
of your conviction and sentence.
The Board did not accept your contention to the effect that your
wrongful use of cocaine is attributable to the effects of
posttraumatic stress disorder. As indicated above, you had a
long history of cocaine abuse which you concealed in order to
procure your enlistment, and there is no credible evidence that
your in-service use of cocaine was related to your alleged ,
posttraumatic stress disorder. The Board was not persuaded that
it would be in the interest of justice for it to recommend that
your bad conduct discharge be upgraded to general or honorable.
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,
W. DEAN ‘B .
Executive ector
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11128-09
, The Board concluded that in view of your failure to disclose your pre-service history of posttraumatic stress disorder when you applied for enlistment, it would not be in the interest of justice to correct your record to show that you were retired by reason of physical disability due to posttraumatic stress disorder. In the Board’s opinion, the provisions of title 38, Code of Federal Regulations, part 4.129 (38CFR4.129) required VA rating officials to apply a convalescent rating, rather...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09097-06
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you served active duty in the US Army from 6 August 1985 to 21 November 1991,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08797-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. Your receipt of a combined disability rating of 10% from the VA shortly after you were released from active duty is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because those ratings were assigned without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty on 25 June 1985. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08410-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your haval 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 | 12563-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 2010. You were discharged by reason of misconduct/drug abuse on 25 April 1997, with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. 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 | CY2009 | 04872-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2009. You were discharged under other than honorable conditions on 22 September 1988 by reason of misconduct-drug abuse. 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 | CY2007 | 01180-07
Specifically, the panel of the Board that considered your case was not persuaded you were issued the silencing order described in your application, that you suffered from posttraumatic stress disorder while serving on active duty in the Navy, or that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability prior to your separation from the Navy. Two other survivors of the Liberty attack have applied for correction of their naval...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07721-09
You had no military status during the period from 26 June 1979 to 19 December 1988. , The Board considered your application and all pertinent records in accordance with the provisions of SECNAV Instruction 5420.193, enclosure (1), Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (codified at 32 CFR 723), paragraph 3e. During the 1979-1989 period, you received treatment from VA health care providers for multiple conditions such as hip, back and knee pain, chronic recurrent foot pain,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03038-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 7itting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 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. On 5 December 1994 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reaton of misconduct due to commission of a...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901154
Furthermore, the NDRB found documentation that the Applicant withheld pertinent information with regards to his pre-service history of anxiety and additional drug usage besides marijuana upon enlistment.In verifying the Applicant’s PTSD, the NDRB found in the Applicant’s PDHA of 27 September 2005, that there was nothing noted by the Applicant or the Health Care Provider to suggest a referral or an additional follow-up appointment was required. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...