DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7011S. COURTHOUSE ROAD. SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON. VA 22204-2490
TIR
Docket No: 8553-14
12 February 2015
cor
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
States Code, Section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 3 February 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 enti
recora, the Board found the evidence submitted was insuf
to establish the existence of probable material error or
Injustice:
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 1
August 1973. You served for about 10 months without discipiinary
incident, but on 21 June and again on 1¢é September 1974, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for communicating a threat,
disrespect, and disobedience. Shortly thereafter, on 20
September 1974, you began 4a period of unauthorized absence (UA).
In April 1975, while in a UA status, you were convicted by civil
authorities of possession.
On 9 June 1976, the foregoing period of YA was terminated. Asa
result, on 13 June 1976, you submitted 2a written request for an
other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-
maxtial for two periods of UA totalling 259 days and failure to
obey a lawful order. 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 discharge. Subsequently, your
request was granted and the commanding officer was directed to
issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of the good
of the service. As a 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 18
June 1976, you werg igsued an other than honorable discharge.
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 a
diagnosed post-traumatic stress @isorder (PTSD). Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
relief in your case because of the seriousness of your misconduct
to include a civil conviction, and repetitive and lengthy periods
which resulted in your request for discharge. The Board believed
that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request
for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved.
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 change it now.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
Your assertion that you suffered from PTSD was fully and
carefully considered by the Board 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. in accordance with the guidance,
the Board gave liberal and special consideration to treatment
record documentation of PTSD symptoms and Department of Veteran
Affairs determinations of the existence of service connected
PTSD. In addition, the Board provided liberal consideration to
finding PTSD where a service record substantiated the existence
of PTSD symptoms or when a civilian provider diagnosed PTSD.
After applying these guidelines to the evidence in the case, the
Board was not able to substantiate the existence of PTSD in your
case.
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 or other matter not previously considered by the Board
within one year from the date of the Board’s decision. in
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption
reqularitv attaches to all official records Consequently
applying for a correction of an official naval record, the
is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probabl
material error or injustice.
this
of
when
burden
ROBERT J. O’NEILL
Fxecutive Director
J
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8553 14
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 | NR2340 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. As a result, on 2 February 1973, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2340 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. As a result, on 2 February 1973, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5880 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 June 2015. After applying these guidelines to the evidence in the case, the Board was not able to substantiate the existence of PTSD in your case. 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 | NR10758 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 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. After applying these guidelines to the evidence in the case, the Board was not able to substantiate the existence of PTSD in your case.
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5593 14_Redacted
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 30} S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 iad: Hoo SEOs Docket No: 5593-14 1° F aya" f 12 February AOL'S RK three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2015. The BCD was approved at all levels of review and on 26 October 1969, you were 50 discharged The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully...
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 | 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...