DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 


Docket No. 7405-18 
Ref: Signature Date 


Dear 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of 10 USC 1552. Your case was reconsidered in accordance with procedures that 
conform to Lipsman v. Secretary of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). You were 
previously denied relief by the Board on 1 February 2006. 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, your application 
has been denied. 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 4 April 2019. 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, relevant portions of your naval record and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability 
retirement list and have your characterization of service upgraded to Honorable. You assert that 
you were suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Myelodysplasia syndrome 
with leukemia at the time of your discharge. You also rely on the fact that the Department of 
Veterans Affairs (VA) has since rated you a combined 100% as a result of your Myelodysplasia 
syndrome condition. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. First, the 
Board concluded you were ineligible for military disability benefits as a result of your 
administrative separation for misconduct on 20 April 1983. Disability regulations direct that 
misconduct processing superseded any disability processing. So even if you were referred to the 
Disability Evaluation System in 1983, you would not have been eligible for disability processing 
based on your misconduct discharge. Second, the Board found no evidence that you were 
suffering an occupational impairment as a result of PTSD or Myelodysplasia syndrome. There 
was no diagnosis for either condition in 1983 or any evidence you were unable to perform the 
duties of your office, grade, rank or rating as a result of symptoms of either condition. 

Third, the Board found no evidence of a PTSD diagnosis or any mental health condition that may excuse or mitigate your discharge. As a result, they concluded liberal consideration did not apply in your case. Fourth, the Board also concluded that the fact the VA has issued you a disability rating of 100% since your release from active duty does not warrant an upgrade to your characterization of service or reason for separation. As explained earlier, you were not eligible for disability processing due to your misconduct processing. Additionally, the Board did not feel your current disability conditions merited a change to your characterization of service. In their opinion, your six non-judicial punishments in less than two years, including at least two offenses which qualified for punitive discharges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, was too much 
misconduct to be offset by the existence of your disability conditions. Accordingly, the Board 
determined insufficient evidence of error or injustice exists to warrant a change to your record. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable 
action cannot be taken again. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 
submission of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered 
by the Board. In the absence of sufficient new and material evidence for reconsideration, the 
decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the 
Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 

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, 

4/8/2019 

Executive Director