DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 2005-16 
FEB 03 2017 

Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 10 ofthe United States Code, section 1552. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of 
justice to waive the statute oflimitations and consider your application on its merits. A threemember 
panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 23 November 2016. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 
panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror and injustice were reviewed in 
accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings ofthis 
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, 
regulations, and policies. 

After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence 
submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

You reenlisted in the Navy on 4 June 1963 after more than three years or prior service. You 
served for a year and nine months without disciplinary incident, but during the period from 
4 April 1964 to 24 June 1965, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions and 
were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM). Your offenses were drunk and disorderly 
conduct and unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for periods totaling 26 days. 

On 19 July 1965, you were the subject ofa psychiatric evaluation by the Board of Medical 
Survey, due to an admission on 28 June 1965 to the for depressive reaction. You were diagnosed with a schizoid personality that existed prior to enlistment. Your financial burdens and interpersonal stress due to being unhappy with your 
assignment to and having to take your pregnant wife to her parent's home, triggered your lack ofability to adequately perform your duties. It was assessed that you had reached the limit ofyou adaptability and were no longer fit to be returned to duty 
status. It was recommended that you should be discharged from the naval service. 

Subsequently, you were notified ofpending administrative separation by reason of unsuitability 
at which time you waived your procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and to present 
your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Your commanding officer recommended 
discharge under honorable conditions by reason of unsuitability. The discharge authority 
approved this recommendation and directed separation under honorable conditions by reason of 
unsuitability and on 17 August 1965, you were so discharged. 

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your character of service and assertion of posttraumatic 
stress disorder (PTSD) as a reason forjyour misconduct. Nevertheless, the Board 
concluded these factors were not sufficient to wl)rrant relief in your case, and that you did not 
provide sufficient evidence of an error or injustice to support your claim. Accordingly, your 
application has been denied. 

Your assertion ofPTSD was carefully considered by the Board in light ofthe Secretary of 
Defense's Memorandum "Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of 
Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming PostTraumatic 
Stress Disorder" ofSeptember 3, 2014; The memorandum recognizes that these 
Boards are not investigative bodies, but provides supplemental guidance to assist the Boards in 
reaching fair and consistent results when considering whether medical or other evidence 
indicates PTSD may have contributed to or mitigated the circumstances of a veteran's discharge 
from the military. However, the Board concluded the information in your service record and 
statements you provided was not enough to substantiate your claim ofPTSD at the time ofyour 
misconduct. 

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 ofnew and material 
evidence within one year from the date of the Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not 
previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 ofan official naval record, the burden is on the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director