DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
I701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001· 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No. 6445-15 
HAY 2 0 2016 I 
' 

This is in reference to your application for· correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 use 1552. 

Although your application was not fiied in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limit ations and consider your case on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your applicat ion on 1 April 2016. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accor.dance with admini strative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the ·Board consisted of your application, together with al l material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in December 1988. On 19 May 1992, you requested a humanitarian 
transfer off your ship to care for your child as a single parent. On 29 May 1992, you request was granted and you were transferred to Navy Marine Corps Reserve Center Houston on 8 ·June 1992. You subsequently went into an unauthorized absence status from 4 September 1992 through 9 September 1992 resulting in the imposition of non-judicial punishment. Shortly thereafter, on 23 September 1992, you requested a . hardship discharge to care for your child. Your request was granted and you were discharged on 2 October 1992. After your discharge, effective 3 December 2012, the Department of Veterans Affairs granted you a 70% service conp.ected disability rating for your mood disorder condition. You were al so rated 60% disabled f or psuedofolliculitis effective 21 July 2011 . 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a disability retirement due to your Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder that 
exist ed prior to your discharge. You contend t hat you suffered from stress and depression prior to your humanitarian transfer and that your condition would have qualified you for referral to t he Disability Evaluation System. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed· with your rationale for relief. The Board could not find evidence to support your contention that you possessed a mood disorder prior to your discharge and that it substant ially impaired your ability to perform your duties. Your overall performance trait average was 3.28 despite three non-judicial punishments in less than four years. Addi tionally, the Board noted that you were granted your early release from active duty in accordance with your request. Therefore, they concluded the Navy did not. improperly discharge you and no injustice exists due to their decision to grant you your request. Accordingly, the Board was unable to find an error or injustice warranting a correction to your record and denied your application. The names and votes of the members of the. panel will be furnished upon request. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have t he Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new evidence within one year from the date of t he Board' s decision. New €vidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in .this case. In this regard, i t 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 applic~t to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 
Sincerely, 

Executive Director 
2