Dear 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 relevant portions of your naval record and your application, 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 case on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2020. 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions contained in BUMED letter 5740 Ser M34/17UM34192 undated, Psychiatric Advisor CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 23 June 2020, and Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 001 of 31 July 2020 along with your response to the CORB advisory opinions. A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in December 1966. On 13 August 1967, non-judicial punishment was imposed on you for unauthorized absence. You subsequently deployed to in October 1967 and served in a combat zone until approximately 14 June 1968. During your combat tour, you were diagnosed with symptoms of nervousness that required your transfer to new duties. After your return from , you served without incident through most of 1968 until non-judicial punishment was again imposed on you for failing to comply with a regulation. The following year, you were convicted by two summary courts-martial for multiple periods of unauthorized absences. On 13 April 1970, you were diagnosed with a paranoid personality with explosive features and recommended for administrative separation. However, you commenced another period of unauthorized absence that was terminated when you were arrested and convicted by civilian authorities for petty larceny and carrying a deadly weapon. After you were returned to military custody in 1971, you commenced another period of unauthorized absence that again ended with your arrest and conviction by civilian authorities. During your time in civilian custody, you were diagnosed with latent schizophrenia but determined to be mentally competent. After your conviction, you were discharged with an Other than Honorable characterization of service for your civilian conviction. Post-discharge, you were diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Depression. After initially being denied relief by the Naval Discharge Review Board, this Board eventually upgraded your characterization of service to General under Honorable Conditions based, in part, on the BUMED advisory opinion that determined your mental health condition interfered with your judgment and led to your undesirable discharge from the Marine Corps. The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve to be placed on the disability retirement list with at least a 30% disability rating for your PTSD condition. You argue that had current standards been applied to your case, you would have been found unfit for continued naval service and medically retired due to your combat trauma. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. In making their findings, the Board applied the current Department of Defense policies regarding liberal consideration of your mental health status in the consideration of your request for relief before this Board. Based on the BUMED advisory opinion, this Board again concluded that you suffered from a mental health condition that occurred during your military service and a nexus existed between your misconduct and mental health condition. However, the Board concluded that your discharge from the Marine Corps for misconduct was appropriate based on the severity of your misconduct despite the mitigation from your mental health condition. The Board considered the fact that your robbery and carrying an unlicensed weapon offenses are of a nature to bring great discredit to the Armed Forces and qualify for punitive discharges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Further, the Board considered the clarifying guidance issued under 25 August 2017 memorandum from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense that states premediated misconduct is not generally excused by mental health condition including PTSD. Therefore, when liberally balancing the mitigation offered by your mental health condition against the civilian conviction for robbery and carrying an unlicensed firearm, the Board concluded that the severity of the misconduct that formed the civilian conviction was too serious to excuse despite the nexus between your mental health condition. Since the Board found no evidence you were erroneously convicted, the Board determined that you were properly discharged for misconduct for your civilian misconduct. Therefore, based on the Board determination that you were properly discharged for misconduct, the Board also concluded you were ineligible for disability processing or placement on the disability retirement list regardless of your unfitness status at the time. In the Board’s opinion, your misconduct would have disqualified you for disability processing even under current standards based on the seriousness of your civilian offenses. While the Board empathizes with your current medical condition and the circumstances of your case, they felt compensation and treatment for your disability conditions fall outside the scope of the Department of Defense disability system based on your misconduct related discharge and under the purview of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 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 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,