DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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


Docket No: 0774-16 
DEC 15 2016 

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 13 July 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 enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period ofactive duty on 6 November 1989. 
On 11 October 1991 and 24 January 1992, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for 
disobeying a lawful order and assault. On 2 October 1992, you were convicted by a special court 
martial (SPCM) ofassault. You were adjudged a bad conduct discharge (BCD), confinement, 
and forfeiture ofpay. After the BCD was approved at all levels ofreview and the appellate 
review process on 21 March 1995, 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 ofservice and assertion ofposttraumatic 
stress disorder (PTSD) as a reason for your misconduct. Nevertheless, the Board 
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because ofthe severity 
ofyour misconduct that resulted in a BCD, and you did not provide sufficient evidence of an 
error or injustice to support your claim. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

As for your assertion that your discharge was in 1992 not 1995, the Marine Corps allowed you to 
depart without pay pending final review ofyou court martial and BCD in 1992 but your case was 
reviewed and approved by the appellate review process on 21 March 1995, which reflects your 
official discharge date. 

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" of September 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 
statement you provided was not enough to substantiate your claim ofPTSD at the time ofyour 
misconduct. The Board further concluded that, even if PTSD existed at the time ofyour 
discharge, the severity ofyour misconduct outweighed any mitigation that would be offered by 
thePTSD. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour 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 ofthe 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 ofregularity 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 ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director