DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TLG
Docket No: 7812-14
20 August 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
14 August 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 on 28 February 1975, and serve for
about six months without incident. However, during the period
from 25 September 1975 to 9 March 1977, you received three
nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for eight days of unauthorized
absence (UA), absence from your appointed Place of duty,
possession of marijuana, and failure to report the possession or
use of marijuana by another person. On 10 April 1979, while in
the Navy reserve, you received NJP for being absence from
appointed place of duty and reporting to drill in civilian
clothes. On 18 June 1977, you were discharge from active duty
into the U. S. Naval Reserve under honorable conditions.
SES ae
On 14 January 1981, upon expiration of your enlistment service
obligation, you received a general discharge from the Naval
Reserve. At that time you were not recommended for retention or
reenlistment.
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 that your
post service diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
contributed to your misconduct while on active duty.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant relief given your misconduct. In this
regard, the Board concluded that your record of multiple
infractions/offenses, which resulted in four NUPs, outweighed
your desire to upgrade your discharge. Regarding your assertion
of suffering from PTSD, the Board noted that your misconduct
occurred prior to your diagnosis of PTSD.
The purpose of the Secretary of Defense memorandum on PTSD is to
ease the process for veterans seeking to upgrade an "other than
honorable" discharge based on misconduct with a PTSD nexus and
assist the Boards in reaching fair and consistent results. 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 policy specifically
covers veterans who received other than honorable (OTH)
discharges. You received a general discharge under honorable
conditions; a characterization of service that is greater than
an OTH discharge. Accordingly, the Board determined that your
application was not covered by the guidance. In the end, the
Board closely examined both the language and intent of the
policy memorandum. 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 | NR5226 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. 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 | NR5226 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. 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 | NR5464 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1813 14
At the time of your service, a conduct average of 4.0 was required for a fully honorable characterization of service, The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service, Vietnam service , desire to upgrade your discharge and assertion that your post service diagnosed Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) contributed to your misconduct while on active duty. The policy specifically...
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 | 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 | NR1220 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2015. The policy specifically covers veterans who received other than honorable discharges. 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 | NR1220 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2015. The policy specifically covers veterans who received other than honorable discharges. 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 | NR7562 14_Redacted
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 | NR3640 14
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and desire to have your SCM removed from your official records. The policy specifically covers veterans who received OTH discharges. 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.