DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 5S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
This is in reference to your application for correcti
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of
States Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
—~ 2 * . 4
application on 7 April 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 appl icabl
proceedings of this Board. Documentary
the Board consisted of your
material
Tlentious
the evi lent
existence of p
You enlisted in the Marine Cory gan a period of active
duty on 7 April 1966. On 18 Ma a summary mart
(SCM) charged you with failing to go at the time pi
your appointed place of duty, and disobeying a law
4
your superior noncommissioned officer. You were found not Lt
of disobeying a lawful order, and were only convicts of failing
to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty :
You were sentenced to 30 days of confinement at hard labor. On
18 March 1976, the convening authority approved your sentence and
ordered the execution of your confinement at hard labor. You
remained on active duty until you were transferred to the Marine
Corps Reserve on 12 April 1968, at the completion your
required service.
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant the removal of your SCM
conviction from your official records because you were found not
guilty of disobedience. Finally, the Board is expressly
forbidden from reviewing the findings of guilt rendered by a
court-martial and must restrict its review to the appropriateness
of the sentence. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
The purpose of the Secretary of Defense memorandum on Post-
Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is to ease the process for
veterans seeking to upgrade and “other than honorable” (OTH)
discharge based on misconduct with PTSD nexus and assist the
Board 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 OTH discharges. You received a general discharge under
honorable conditions; a characterization of service that is
greater than an OTH discharge. Accordingly, the panel determined
that your application was not covered by the guidance. In making
this decision, the panel closely examined both the language and
intent of the policy memorandum.
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.
Sinceyely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
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 | 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 | 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 | NR6699 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01145 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of three NJP’s, two convictions by SPCM’s, and by two SCM’s of serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00082-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00214-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 13 October 2011. On 13 December 1961, you received NUP for three incidents of 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 | 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 | CY2011 | 03524-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 February 2012. 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 26 September 1991, administrative separation action was initiated by reason of misconduct.