Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4339 14_Redacted
Original file (NR4339 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

JDR
Docket No: 4339-14
27 April 2015

 

This is in reference to your latest reconsideration request
dated 13 January 2014. You previously petitioned the Board and
were advised in our letter of 19 March 2014 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 17 April 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,

    

ROBERT J. O’NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | NR10560 14

    Original file (NR10560 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 3 March 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | NR4308 14

    Original file (NR4308 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 17 April 2014. The Board liberally considered whether your PTSD was a causative factor in the misconduct that resulted in your discharge. 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 | NR4308 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR4308 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 17 April 2014. 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 | NR7562 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7562 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 6 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 | 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.