DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 7395-18 Ref: Signature Date This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. Although your application was not filed in a 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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a qualified Navy mental health professional dated 30 April 2019, which was previously provided to you. You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 19 August 1968. Your service record indicates you served in from 16 February 1969 to 2 February 1970. During the period from 3 August 1970 to 25 March 1971, you received three nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for disobeying a lawful order, and two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 12 days. On 11 June 1971, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of six days of UA, and missing movement with your company. On 9 September 1971, you signed an Acknowledgement of Limitations and Scope of Drug Abuse Exemptions Program form. In it, you requested exemption from disciplinary action or administrative processing that a statement that you first used drugs, marijuana, in 1968, while stationed at . You stated that you did not experience drugs again until reaching in February 1969, when you first used lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). While in you mostly used marijuana and liquid speed. You used heroin or cocaine post- in . Your drug exemption request was granted the same day, which protected you from an other than honorable discharge. On 13 September 1971, medical personnel diagnosed you with drug abuse and recommended that you nonetheless be administratively separated from the Marine Corps. On 8 January 1972, you were notified of administrative discharge action and that, if discharged, you would receive a discharge under honorable or general conditions. You were also notified that you were not entitled to be represented by counsel, but that you could consult with an attorney if you chose to. Your commanding officer forwarded your case to the separation authority and explained that, although you had an outstanding record while in , you claimed a three-year history of drug abuse. He stated that your work had been lacking in motivation, and you were a detriment to your unit, and your disciplinary problems showed no sign of improving. The commanding general directed that you receive a general discharge by reason of unfitness. You received a general discharge on 3 February 1972. You request an upgrade of your characterization of service on the basis that you suffered from unrecognized post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) at the time of your military service. Your request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense's 3 September 2014 memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder,” the 25 August 2017 memorandum, “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual Harassment,” and the 25 July 2018 memorandum, “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations.” A qualified Navy mental health professional reviewed your request and provided the Board with an AO regarding your assertion you were suffering from PTSD during service. The AO noted, in part, that in your request for review you submitted a statement that you incurred PTSD during your combat deployment to . You stated that your misconduct occurred following your deployment and was attributed to PTSD incurred during your combat experience. You submitted a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability rating decision of 50% service-connected disability for PTSD, as well as several statements from peers, family, and community members attesting to your character and contribution in the community. No additional post-service treatment records were available for review. The AO stated that it is reasonable to attribute your UA and disobedience of a superior to PTSD symptoms of avoidance and irritability. However, you made several statements during your military service that your substance abuse predated your deployment to , notably in 1968 while in . The AO thus opined that there is evidence to attribute some, but not all, of your misconduct to PTSD. The Board carefully considered your request to upgrade the characterization of your discharge. The Board also considered your contentions that your DD Form 214 states you were in Company L, when you were always in Company M, that you were the subject of a summary court-martial (SCM) instead of a SPCM, and that your medical evaluation is in error because PTSD was not then recognized. Additionally, you were not provided counsel during your administrative separation, and given your record in combat during , and the fact that your PTSD was not recognized until years later, it is unjust to give you a general discharge holding UA violations connected to PTSD against you. The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge. Your request to have the unit you were attached to corrected on your DD Form 214, this is an administrative correction and you must write to the Commandant of the Marine Corps, Records and Performance Branch (MMRP), 2008 Elliot Road, Quantico, VA 22134-5030, to request an administrative correction. Regarding your court-martial conviction, your official records show that, on 11 June 1971, you were convicted by SPCM, not summary court-martial. Although you had not talked to counsel during your administrative separation proceedings, you were not entitled to be represented by counsel only to speak to one of your choosing, which was contained in you notification of rights. If you did not seek out counsel to discuss the administrative separation with, that is not an error attributable to the Marine Corps. Regarding your belief that you received a general discharge because UA violations connected to PTSD were held against you, a characterization of service was based in part on conduct marks assigned on a periodic basis. Your conduct average was 3.6. and, at the time of your service, a conduct average of 4.0 was required to be considered for a fully honorable characterization of service. Finally, the Board concurred with the AO’s statement that there is evidence to attribute some but not all of your misconduct to PTSD. For these reasons, the Board discerned no material error or injustice in your characterization of service. 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 the submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149. New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board. 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, 10/9/2019