DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S$, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE (oof
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SION
Docket No: 510-14
10 February 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 in a 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
21 January 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 Navy and began a period of active duty on
11 September 1979. On 30 January and 20 February 1981, you.
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two periods of
unauthorized absence (UA). On 16 March -1981, you were convicted
by special court-martial (SPCM) of two specifications of UA
totaling 308 days. You were sentenced to a forfeiture of pay and
confinement at hard labor. On 29 July 1981, you received a third
NUP for two periods of UA. Subsequently, administrative
discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to
frequent involvement. You waived your rights to consult counsel,
submit a statement, or have your case heard by an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 12 August 1981, your case was
forwarded to the separation authority. On 18 August 1981, the
separation authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of
misconduct. You were so discharged on 27 August 1981.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your record of service, desire to upgrade your discharge, post
service diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and
belief that your discharge would automatically change after six
fionths. It also considered your assertion that you had an
undiagnosed mental health issues and personality/mood disorder.
Nevertheless, the Board.concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your NJP and SPCM conviction. Concerning your assertions of
having undiagnosed mental health issues and personality/mood
disorder, there is no evidence in the record to support them, and
you submitted no such evidence. Regarding your assertion of
suffering from PTSD at the time of your misconduct, the Board can
only consider assertions of PTSD when an applicant presents clear
evidence that the PTSD is service connected and related to the
alleged error or injustice. Despite stating that you were
suffering from PTSD while on active duty, the Board determined it
insufficient to warrant relief. Further, you are advised that
there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows
for recharacterization of a discharge automatically after six
months or due solely to the passage of time. 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.
Sincerel
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12070 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2015.. Asa result, you were processed for an administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug under other ‘than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, which was in direct Gisregard to the Navy's ‘Zero Tolerance’ Policy, and conviction by civil authorities for possession of marijuana. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12070 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 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 with supporting documentation, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors,...
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 | 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009500
b. Criterion B, intrusion symptoms: The traumatic event is persistently re-experienced in the following way(s): (one required). In view of the foregoing, on 3 September 2014 the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06976-07
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.On 23 January 1979, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 19. In connection with this processing,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7285 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. 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 | CY2007 | 09240-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2008. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that 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 | NR657 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...