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

Docket No: 2517-17 

JUN 2 O 2018 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious 
consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to 
establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application 
has been denied. 

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 of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 24 April 2018. The names and votes of the members of the panel 
will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror 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 of your application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, Advisory 

Opinion (AO) dated 3 October 2017, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

You enlisted in the Navy on 10 February 1969. During the period from 17 May 1969 to 26 
March 1970, you received three non-judicial punishments (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful 
order, public intoxication, possession of an unauthorized vehicle pass, disobeying a lawful order, 
wrongful possession of marijuana, and wrongful use of marijuana. You elected to consult with 
legal counsel and subsequently requested an Administrative Discharge Board (ADB). The ADB 
found that you committed misconduct due to drug abuse and recommended you receive an other 
than honorable (OTH) discharge. The separation authority concurred with the ADB and directed 
an OTH discharge by reason of unfitness. On 31 March 1970, you were discharged. On 13 
January 1972, the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB) changed your characterization of 
service to general under honorable conditions. 

Your contention that you suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was fully and 
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 Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress 
Disorder" of 3 September 2014 and the "Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review 
Board and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans 
for Modification oftheir Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual 
Harassment" memorandum of25 August 2017. 

BUMED also reviewed your request for correction to your record and provided the Board with 
an AO dated 3 October 2017, regarding your assertion of suffering from PTSD. The AO noted 
that you claimed that martial difficulties contributed to your drug use. You did not specify any 
service connected traumatic events that you experienced while in the Navy. About 46 years after 
discharge on 1 December 2016, you were awarded 100% service connected disability for an 
unspecified medical condition by the VA. Other than your marital difficulties, you did not 
specify any service connected traumatic events stateside or in Vietnam. In-service 
documentation attested to your drug abuse, but there were no symptoms mentioned that were 
consistence with the diagnosis of PTSD. It is the opinion of the AO that there is insufficient 
evidence to support your contention that you had service connected PTSD which contributed to 
his misconduct. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as the AO, rebuttal to the 
AO, service connected disability from VA, your desire to upgrade your character ofservice and 
contention of PTSD as a reason for your misconduct. The Board found no nexus between PTSD 
and your misconduct. The Board also concurred with the AO's statement that there was 
insufficient evidence to support your contention that you had service connected PTSD which 
contributed to your misconduct and discerned no impropriety or inequity in your discharge. 

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 of an official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director