Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10560 14
Original file (NR10560 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2480

JDR
ga . Docket No: 10560-14
17 March 2015

 

pear ay

This is in reference to your latest reconsideration request
dated 6 August 2014. You previously petitioned the Board and
were advised in our letter of 28 January 2004 that your
application had been denied.

Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-
member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session on 3 March 2015. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
of your application and any material submitted in support of
your application.

The Board also considered your diagnosis of post-traumatic
stress disorder (PTSD) in light of the Secretary of Defense’s
September 3, 2014 guidance to Boards for Correction of Military
records regarding discharge upgrade requests by veterans
claiming PTSD. The Board liberally considered whether your PTSD
was a causative factor in the misconduct that resulted in your
separation. After full and careful consideration of the matter,
the Board determined that there was insufficient evidence in the
record to support a conclusion that a causal relationship with
the PTSD symptoms and misconduct existed. Specifically, the
Board concluded that your misconduct was not caused by your PTSD
and further determined that, even if there was a nexus between
the PTSD and the misconduct, the severity of the misconduct
would substantially outweigh any mitigation created by your
PTSD. 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 within one year from the date of the Board's
decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by
the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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,

. os

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4339 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR4339 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your current request has been carefully examined by a three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 17 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 | CY2014 | NR4339 14

    Original file (NR4339 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your current request has been carefully examined by a three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 17 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 | CY2014 | NR11871 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR11871 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your current request has been carefully examined by a three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 4 February 2015. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined your correspondence including your RCS Client Information Record and letter from your veteran center counselor, even though not previously considered by the Board, was insufficient to establish the existence of material error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5944 14

    Original file (NR5944 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2015. 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 liberally considered whether your PTSD was a causative factor in the misconduct that resulted in your discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5944 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR5944 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2015. 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 | CY2014 | NR4543 14

    Original file (NR4543 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Because your application was submitted with new evidence not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your application. Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 24 April 2015. Specifically, the Board concluded that your misconduct was not caused by your PTSD and further determined that, even if there was a nexus between the PTSD and the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4543 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR4543 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Because your application was submitted with new evidence not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your application. Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 24 April 2015. Specifically, the Board concluded that your misconduct was not caused by your PTSD and further determined that, even if there was a nexus between the PTSD and the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR827 12

    Original file (NR827 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 2015. The Board, in its review of your record and application with its supporting documentation, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, guch as your allegations that your discharge was improperly effectuated, a BOL recommendation was not given due consideration, and an injustice occurred when you were refused orders that would allow you to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3901 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR3901 14_Redacted.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 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 | CY2014 | NR6863 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR6863 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2015. On 17 July 1985, you were notified of administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse at which time you waived your procedural rights. 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.