DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 2814-15
23 April 2015
This is in reference to your application for
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
correction of your
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 st
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
23 April 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 peri
August 1974. You satisfactorily served f 5
during the period from 19 July 1975 to 19 September 1978, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions for using
provoking speeches or gestures, two periods of failure to go to
your appointed place of duty, two specifications of failure to
obey a lawful order, and assault. The punishment imposed at your
14 March 1979 NJP was reduction to paygrade E-4, which was
suspended for six months. However, your misconduct continued and
about a month later the reduction was vacated. Shortly
thereafter, on 12 April 1979, while serving in paygrade E-4, you
were honorably released from active duty and transferred to the
Naval Reserve. On 13 August 1980, you were honorably discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to reinstate your paygrade to E-5 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 repetitive
misconduct, which resulted in four NUPs. Regarding your
assertion, the Board noted that the severity of your misconduct
outweighed the mitigation offered by your unsubstantiated claim
for 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 or other matter not previously considered by the Board
within one year from the date of the Board’s decision. 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 efficial 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 | 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 | NR4295 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 April 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5626 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5S 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. 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 | NR4296 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4296 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. 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. 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 | 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 | NR660 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. Nonetheless, your request was denied and the BCD was subsequently approved at all levels of review, and on 30 January 1976, you were so discharged.
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 | NR4626 14
A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 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...