DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE too!
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SIN
Docket No: 1813-14
24 March 2015
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.
Although your application was not filed ina timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of
limitations. and consider your application on its merits. A
three-member.panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, |
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March
2015. 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
31 May 1968. During the period from 31 January 1969 to 22 February
1370, you received three nonjudicial punishments (NUJPs). On 7 July
1970, you were the subject of a psychiatric evaluation that diagnosed
you with an aggressive reaction, severe, that existed prior to your
entry into the service. On 7 August 1970, you received NJP for
30 days of unauthorized absence. Subsequently, you were notified of
pending administrative separation action by reason of unsuitability
due to the diagnosed aggressive reaction. You were afforded all of
your procedural rights including the opportunity to submit a statement
on your behalf. You case was forwarded to the separation authority
and it was directed that you be separated. You received a general
discharge on 27 August 1970.
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct and
proficiency averages computed from marks assigned on a periodic basis.
Your conduct average was 3.5. At the time of your service, a conduct
average of 4.0 was required for a fully honorable characterization of
service,
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your
record of service, Vietnam service , desire to upgrade your discharge
and assertion that your post service diagnosed Post Traumatic Stress
Disorder (PTSD) contributed to your misconduct while on active duty.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your four NUP‘s,
medical diagnoses that existed prior to entry into the service, and
failure to attain the conduct average required for an honorable
discharge.
The purpose of the Secretary of Defense memorandum on PTSD is to ease
the process for veterans seeking to upgrade an “other than honorable"
discharge based on misconduct with a PTSD nexus and assist the Boards
in reaching fair and consistent results. The memorandum describes the
difficulty veterans face on "upgrading their discharges based on
claims of previously unrecognized" PTSD. The Secretary explains that
Since PTSD was not previously recognized as a diagnosis at the time of
service for many veterans, and diagnoses were often not made until
after service was completed, veterans were constrained in their _
arguments that PTSD should be considered in mitigation for misconduct
committed or were unable to establish a nexus between PTSD and the
misconduct underlying their discharge. The policy specifically covers
veterans who received other than honorable (OTH) discharges. You
received a general discharge under honorable conditions; a
characterization of service that is greater than an OTH discharge.
Accordingly, the Board determined that your application was not
covered by the guidance. In making this decision, the Board closely
examined both the language and intent of the policy memorandum,
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 | NR7812 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 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 policy specifically covers veterans who received other than honorable (OTH) discharges.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3640 14
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and desire to have your SCM removed from your official records. The policy specifically covers veterans who received OTH discharges. 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 | NR5464 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4376 14_Redacted
A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 Aprii 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all macerial submitted in support thereof, your naval record, anc 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 | NR4376 14
A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitiaating factors, such as your record of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1220 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2015. The policy specifically covers veterans who received other than honorable discharges. 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 | NR1220 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2015. The policy specifically covers veterans who received other than honorable discharges. 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 | NR5226 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. 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 | NR5226 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. 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 | CY1999 | 05486-99
Reenlistme On 31 OCT 64, Review of medical record reveals initial normal physical exam The patient presented with complaints of anxiety on 4. on 15 MAR 62. His active duty behavior (related to what and The tremor, would now be diagnosed as a personality disorder). has been diagnosed as an initially felt to be related to anxiety, Therefore, I essential tremor and th recommend that former character of the discharge to request for change of the "medical" be denied.