DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 2806-16 
DEC l9 2016 

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 of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A threemember 
panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
c.onsidered your application on 12 August 2016. The names and votes ofthe 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 ofthis 
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, 
regulations, and policies. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, Board regulations state that personal 
appearances before the Board are not granted as a right, but only when the Board determines that 
such an appearance will serve some useful purpose. In your case, the Board determined that a 
personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of 
record. 

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 25 August 1987. You 
served without disciplinary incident until 1 June 1989 when you were counseled for unauthorized 
absence (UA) and a declining level ofperformance. On 5 December 1989 and 8November1990, 
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disobedience and two specifications of disrespect. 
On 19 November 1991, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of stealing and 
falsely making a signature. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor, forfeiture of pay, 
reduction in paygrade, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). The BCD was approved at all levels 
ofreview, and on 10 May 1993, you were so discharged. 

The Board, in its review ofyour application and record, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your characterization of service and your 
contention ofan illegal court-martial. The Board also considered your your assertion of 
untreated post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Nevertheless, the Board concluded these 
factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because no error or injustice was 
identified in your records·. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

Your assertion ofPTSD was carefully considered by the Board in light of the 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" of September 3, 2014 and the Principle Deputy Under Secretary of 
Defense Memo of24 February 2016 "Consideration ofDischarge Upgrade Requests Pursuant to 
Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records 
(BCMRs/BCNR) by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic 
Brain Injury (TBI)." However, the Board concluded that the statement you provided was not 
enough to outweigh the seriousness of your misconduct. Additionally, you provided no evidence 
to support your assertion that PTSD may have existed at the time ofyour misconduct. As a 
result, the Board was unable to substantiate your claims of PTSD at the time ofyour misconduct 
and it was their opinion that the seriousness ofyour misconduct outweighed any mitigation that 
would be offered by the PTSD. 

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 and material 
evidence or other matters not previously considered by the Board within one year from the date 
of the Board's decision. 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 ofprobable 
material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director