DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 6663-16 

Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour Naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 10 of the 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 25 April 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 of this 
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. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that the a personal 
appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issue(s) 
involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and 
considered your case based on the evidence ofrecord. 

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active service on.26 July 1973. On 29 
January 1974, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthonzed absence (UA). On 
22 February 1974, you received a second NJP for UA totaling. On 9 April 1974, you 
commenced a period ofUA totaling 160 days that terminated with your apprehension by civil 
authorities. On 1December1974, you commenced a period ofUA totaling 66 days that 
terminated with your surrender. On 21March1975, you submitted a written request for 
discharge for the good ofthe service (GOS) to avoid trial by court-martial for the 
aforementioned 226 days ofUA. Prior to submitting this request, you conferred with a qualified 
military lawyer, at which time you were advised ofyour rights and warned ofthe probable 
adverse consequences ofaccepting such a discharge. Your request was granted and your 
Commanding Officer was directed to issue an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the 
good ofthe service. As a result ofthis action, you were spared the stigma ofa court-martial 
conviction, as well as the potential penalties of such a punitive discharge. On I April 1975, you 
were discharged. 

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. 
The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed your request to 
upgrade your discharge, character reference letters, medical documentation from 
your contentions that you suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) due to 
being hit in the head by your drill instructor, you were poisoned by contaminated water at 
and your misconduct was the result offamily problems back home. The Board 
concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief given your repeated misconduct. 
In this regard, the Board concluded that the seriousness ofyour misconduct outweighed your 
desire to upgrade your discharge as evidenced by your lengthy period ofUA and GOS request 
from the Marine Corps. 

Your contention that you suffered from PTSD was fully and carefully considered by the Board in 
light ofthe Secretary ofDefense's Memorandum, "Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards 
for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by 
Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder" of3 September 2014. In accordance with 
the guidance, the Board gave liberal and special consideration to his record. After applying these 
guidelines to the evidence in the case, the Board was not able to substantiate the existence of 
PTSD. The Board also noted that you were provided an additional 60 days to submit 
documentation supporting your claim ofPTSD to the Board for Correction ofNaval Records 
(BCNR) and you provided no diagnostic evidence to support your claim. 

Regarding your contention of being poisoned by contaminated water, Public Law 112-154, 
Honoring America's Veterans and Caring for Families Act of2012, requires the 
Veterans Administration to provide health care to Veterans with one or more of 15 specified 
illnesses or conditions. You should contact the nearest office ofthe Department ofVeterans 
Affairs (DV A) concerning your right to apply for benefits or appeal an earlier unfavorable 
determination. 

Finally, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to 
support your contentions of your misconduct being a result offamily problems or being hit in the 
head by your drill instructor. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are such that favorable action cannot be taken 
at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of 
new 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