Dear   
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  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 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 6 May 2021.  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 Medical/Psychiatric Advisor CORB letter 1910 CORB: 001 of 23 February 2021 and Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 001 of 16 March 2021; copies of which were previously provided to you for comment.  
 
A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in April 1967.  You subsequently deployed to Vietnam later that year and participated in three named operations.  On 2 December 1967, you were admitted to U.S. Naval Hospital after complaining of hearing loss but were returned to duty on 12 December 1967.  On 15 February 1968, you entered a period of unauthorized absence (UA) until 22 February 1968.  Upon your return to military custody, you were psychiatrically evaluated and diagnosed with a passive aggressive personality.  Again, you were returned to duty upon which you went UA on 1 April 1968.  You were convicted by a summary court-martial on 24 May 1968 for your UA but you continued to go UA.  Consequently, you were convicted by a special court-martial on 13 September 1968.  During your confinement, you were treated with Thorazine due to mental health symptoms but your passive aggressive personality diagnosis was retained.  Upon your release from confinement, you again went UA from December 1968 until August 1969.  Upon referral of court-martial charges, you submitted a request to be discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  Your request was approved resulting in your discharge on 1 October 1969 with an Other than Honorable characterization of service.  Prior to your discharge, you were medically cleared for separation with a continuing diagnosis of passive aggressive personality.  Post-discharge, you were twice denied an upgrade from the discharge review board.  In addition, you provided medical evidence that you were diagnosed with hearing loss, schizophrenia, and chronic Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in 2019 along with evidence that you have a history of treatment for schizophrenia and multiple admissions to hospitals.    
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a change to your narrative reason for separation to disability.  You assert that you were unfit for continued naval service due to PTSD and hearing loss after your return from Vietnam.  You also argue that you were mentally incompetent at the time of your court-martial.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  In making their findings, the Board substantially concurred with the advisory opinions in your case.  Specifically, the Board agreed that, despite your post-discharge diagnoses, there was insufficient evidence that your active duty diagnosis of passive aggressive personality was erroneous or that your Thorazine prescription was not issued to treat your personality related symptoms.  Further, the Board found no evidence that you were mentally incompetent to stand trial or waive your rights with regard to your trial.  The Board noted that you were examined and cleared for separation two days prior to your discharge from the Marine Corps and not diagnosed with any mental illness at that time.  So the fact you were diagnosed with a Schizophrenia, PTSD, and hearing loss years after your discharge did not persuade the Board you were symptomatic or unfit due those conditions at the time of your discharge.  In making their findings, the Board also noted that you were examined for hearing loss upon your return from Vietnam but cleared for continued service.  Finally, the Board considered that you were disqualified for disability processing or benefits based on your misconduct related discharge that resulted in your Other than Honorable characterization of service.  Therefore, based on these factors, the Board concluded the preponderance of the evidence does not support changing your narrative reason for separation to disability.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record.   
 
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, 
 
5/14/2021
Deputy Director