DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 2032-16 APR 10 2017 Dear This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the provisions ofTitle 10, 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 7 March 2017. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 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 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion (AO) furnished by the Department ofthe Navy, Bureau ofMedicine and Surgery (BUMED) dated 3 January 2016, a copy ofwhich was previously provided to you on 24 January 2017, for an opportunity to comment prior to being considered by the Board. After the 30-day period for comment expired without a response from you, the case was presented to the Board. 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 enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period ofactive duty on 19 September 1967. During the period from 17 August to 26 November 1968, you were convicted by special courtmartial (SPCM) ofthree specifications of sleeping on post and a summary court-martial (SCM) ofthree days ofunauthorized absence (UA). During the period from 2 January to 7 November 1969, you received two non-judicial punishments (NJP) for the following offences: disrespect to a superior officer, improper wearing ofthe uniform, and failure to maintain government quarters. You were also convicted by a second SPCM ofdisobeying a lawful order. You were sentence to forfeiture ofpay, confinement for six months, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). However, the BCD was suspended for six months. Shortly thereafter, on 29 October 1970, you were convicted by SPCM ofdisrespect to a superior officer and two specifications ofdisobeying a lawful order. You were sentence to forfeiture ofpay, reduction to E-1, confinement for six months, and a BCD. On 21April1971, the U.S. Navy Court ofMilitary Review set aside the BCD and returned you to active duty. As a result of the foregoing, administrative discharge action was initiated. You elected to consult with legal counsel and subsequently requested an administrative discharge board (ADB). While waiting on the decision ofthe ADB, you received NJP for nine days ofUA and breaking restriction. The ADB voted to discharge you from the military service and recommended that the characterization ofyour service be an other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement with military authorities. Shortly thereafter, you received an additional NJP for failure to obey a lawful regulation. The discharge authority approved the recommendation from the ADB and directed that you be discharged from the service. On 22 October 1971, you were discharged with an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct. 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 ofpost-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a reason for your misconduct that was not properly diagnosed at the time and post service PTSD diagnosis from the Social Security Administration (SSA). However, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case, because no error or injustice was identified in its review of your records. Accordingly, your application has been denied. Your assertion of PTSD 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 Board, despite giving liberal consideration to your post service PTSD diagnosis from the Social Security Administration (SSA), concluded that although you suffer from a variety ofconditions as documented by the findings ofthe SSA, the evidence provided documents those conditions arose after your military service and were thus not developed as a result ofyour military service. In fact, the only condition noted as being during your service in the SSA report was some hearing loss. The Board also considered the advisory opinion ofBUMED as discussed above which opined that there was, consistent with an examination that was performed while you were in the service, that no syrnptomology was noted documenting PTSD atthe time ofyour service. Therefore, it was the Board's opinion that the seriousness of your misconduct outweighed any mitigation that would be offered by the post-service PTSD and that no change should be made to the characterization ofyour service. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission ofnew and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity 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 ofprobable material error or injustice. Sincerely, Executive Director