DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SON
Docket No: 517-14
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 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
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
3 August 1994. On 7 November 1995 and 2 February 1996, you
received two nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for three instances
of dereliction of duty, two instances of failing to go to your
appointed place of duty, and being incapacitated for the proper
performance of duty. Additionally, you were counseled and warned
after your first NJP, that further misconduct could result in
administrative discharge action. Subsequently, administrative
discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense. You waived your rights to
consult counsel, submit a statement, or have your case heard by
an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 12 February 1996,
your case was forwarded to the separation authority, and on
26 March 1996, the separation authority directed that you receive
a general discharge by reason of misconduct. You were so
discharged on 12 April 1996.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your record of service, post service accomplishments, desire to
_upgrade.your discharge, and assertion that your were dealing with
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) while on active duty.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your two NJP’s for serious offenses. Regarding your assertion
that you were suffering from PTSD while on active duty, the Board
may only consider assertion of PTSD when an applicant presents
clear; evidence that the PTSD ig service connected and related to
the alleged error or injustice. Despite stating that you were
dealing with PTSD while on active duty, the Board determined it
insufficient to warrant relief since there is no evidence in the
record to support your assertion of PTSD. Finally, the Board
noted that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge
since a discharge under other than honorable conditions is often
directed when an individual is discharged for misconduct.
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 | NR517 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2015. Despite stating that you were dealing with PTSD while on active duty, the Board determined it insufficient to warrant relief since there is no evidence in the record to support your assertion of PTSD. 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 | NR8645 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1156 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. 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 be restored to paygrade E-5, and assertion that your diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) contributed to your misconduct while on active duty. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1156 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. 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 | NR1004 14
A. three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 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. You were so ‘discharge on 10 November 1992. : The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1004 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 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 mitigating factors, such as your record of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR510 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5845 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 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 | NR1782 14
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. Subsequently, on 15 November 1994, administrative discharge action was initiated disorder, You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement, or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR13168 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 July 2015. 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. Specifically, the Board looked to see whether it was a causative factor in your misconduct and weighed it against the severity of your actions.