DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SIN
Docket No: 5465-14
16 June 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 5
June 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
ini WSEtce.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 30 July 1986. During the period from 17 July 1987 to 1
September 1989, you received three nonjudicial punishments
(NOPs), and were convicted by two summary courts-martial (SCM).
Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. After being
afforded all of your procedural rights, your case was forwarded
to the separation authority recommending that you receive an
other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. On 11
October 1989, the separation authority concurred and directed an
OTH discharge by reason of misconduct. You were so discharged on
21 October 1989.
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, medical
issues, desire to upgrade your discharge, and assertion that you
are receiving treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder {PTSD)
and Bipolar disorder. Your assertion that you are being treated
for PTSD was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light
of the Secretary of Defense memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to
Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records
Considering Discharge Upgrade Request by Veterans Claiming PTSD”
of 3 September 27024. 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 Board
reviewed your application and gave liberal consideration of your
assertion that you are receiving treatment for PTSD as a
mitigation factor in your misconduct. They weighed the severity
of your misconduct that formed the basis for your discharge.
Nevertheless, based on the information currently contained in
your record, the Board concluded the mitigating factors listed
above including your PTSD, were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your three NUP’s and
SCM convictions. Finally, the Board noted that it appears that
the Board of Veterans’ Appeals upgraded your discharge status to
“Honorable” in order for you to receive VA benefits only, and
does not change or upgrade your characterization of service.
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.
Executive Director
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 | 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 | NR7771 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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 | 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 | NR5944 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. The Board liberally considered whether your PTSD was a causative factor in the misconduct that resulted in your discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2151 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2015. , The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your character of service and assertion of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a reason for your misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR621 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
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...