Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6356 14_Redacted
Original file (NR6356 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

 

TLG
Docket No: 6356-14
14 May 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. The application was filed in
a timely manner.

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

8 May 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 Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 30 May 1974. You served for about five months without
disciplinary incident, but during the period from

21 October 1974 to 5 June 1975, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) and were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM). Your offenses were wrongful appropriation of a radio,
two specifications of violation of a lawful order, and stealing
a watch. You submitted a written request for discharge for the
good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for larceny
of $160. Prior to submitting this request, you conferred with a
qualified military lawyer at which time you were advised of your
rights and warned,of the probable adverse consequences of
accepting such a ,ischarge. Your request was granted and your
commanding officer directed was directed to issue an other than
honorable discharge by reason of the good of the service. Asa
result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-
martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive
discharge and confinement at hard labor. On 23 September 1975,

you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and assertion of post-
traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in
your case because of the seriousness of your misconduct, which
resulted in NJP and conviction by SPCM. Further, the Board
concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the
Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted, and
should not be permitted to change it now. Finally, the Board
considered your assertion of PTSD in light of the Secretary of
Defense’s Memorandum “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards
for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge
Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder” of September 3, 2014. However, the Board was unable
to substantiate your claim of 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

applying fora correction of an official nava

records.

Consequently, when

1 record, the

burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of
probable material error or in }USELCE .

Sincerely,

 

ROB

 

 

ERT J. O’'NI
Fxecutive Director

 

BILL

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2015 | NR1536 15_Redacted

    Original file (NR1536 15_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    tatute of limitations and consider your application on its A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2015. Subsequently, you submitted a written request for a honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for four periods of UA totalling 239 days. On 21 February 1975, your request was granted and the commandina officer was directed to issue you an other than honorable | discharge by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR568 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR568 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although your appli cation was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of jus t ice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your ~pplication on its merits _ A three - member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in execut ive session, considered your application on 3 February 2015 . Regarding your claim of PTSD, the Board may only consider assertion of PTSD when an applicant Rresents clear evidence that the PTSD is service connected...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8553 14

    Original file (NR8553 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 7018S. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2015. 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 | NR8553 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR8553 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 7011S. 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 18 June 1976, you werg igsued an other than honorable 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 | NR510 14

    Original file (NR510 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 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 | NR11612 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR11612 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by of your application, together with all : in support thereof, your naval record, and regulations, and policies record r personality n immaturi heroin, cocaine, amphetamine uana, a diethylamide (LSD). Further, the Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Navy when your request for discharge was granted and you should not be permitted to charige it now. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5845 14

    Original file (NR5845 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 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 | NR5327 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR5327 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 15 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5327 14

    Original file (NR5327 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 15 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...