DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
TAL
Docket No: 172-14
23 October 2014
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 16 October 2014. 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 and began a period of active
duty on 12 October 1967. On 30 August 1968, you were convicted
by summary court-martial (SCM) of using disrespectful language
toward a noncommissioned officer and failure to obey a lawful
order. On 9 September 1968, you received nonjudicial punishment
for unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit. You were
convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) on two occasions of
missing ship’s movement, disobeying a lawful order, UA from your
unit and failure to obey a lawful order. On 16 May 1969, you
were again convicted by SPCM for two instances of UA from your
unit totaling a period of 12 days and failure to go to your
appointed place of duty. The sentenced imposed was confinement
at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge
(BCD). On 10 October 1969, you received the BCD after appellate
review was complete.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and assertions that you
were denied medical treatment in the field, were given false
information by your counsel, and you suffer from post-traumatic
stress disorder (PTSD). Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case
because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct.
Regarding your assertion of suffering from PTSD, the Board noted
that you did not provide a diagnosis and that the severity of
your misconduct outweighed the mitigation of your possible
diagnosis. Finally, there is no evidence in the record, and you
provided none, to support your assertions of being denied
medical treatment and receiving false information from your
counsel. 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,
ROBERT J. O’NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0172 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2014. On 16 May 1969, you were again convicted by SPCM for two instances of UA from your unit totaling a period of 12 days and failure to go to your appointed place of duty. 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 | NR5593 14_Redacted
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 30} S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 iad: Hoo SEOs Docket No: 5593-14 1° F aya" f 12 February AOL'S RK three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2015. The BCD was approved at all levels of review and on 26 October 1969, you were 50 discharged The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7771 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 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. In your case, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4296 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4296 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2015. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3901 14_Redacted
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 | NR5147 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 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 | NR10758 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2015. 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. After applying these guidelines to the evidence in the case, the Board was not able to substantiate the existence of PTSD in your case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05719-06
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 27 October 1966 at age 17 and served without disciplinary incident until...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR660 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 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. Nonetheless, your request was denied and the BCD was subsequently approved at all levels of review, and on 30 January 1976, you were so discharged.