DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD  

FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370.510

0

WMP
Docket No:
15 October 2002

0130-01

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10 of the
United States Code section 1552.

Your allegations of error and

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 2 October 2002.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board.
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof,
regulations and policies.
advisory opinion furnished by the Psychiatric Department, Naval
Medical Center, Portsmouth, VA dated 1 May 2002, a copy of which
is enclosed.

Documentary material considered by the Board consisted

your naval record and applicable statutes,

In addition, the Board considered the

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 19 July
At that time, you had completed
1965 for four years at age 17.
10 years of education and attained test scores which placed you
in Mental Group III.

Your record reflects that on 28 February 1966 you requested a
Your
hardship discharge due to your father's heart condition.
commanding officer recommended disapproval because your father's
condition existed prior to your enlistment and there was no
The Commandant of the Marine Corps  
financial hardship.
disapproved your request on 1 April 1966.

(CMC)

Your record further reflects that you served without incident
until 9 March 1966, when you received nonjudicial punishment
(NJP) for failure to be at your appointed place of duty and
The punishment imposed was 10
failure to obey a lawful order.
On 12 April 1966
days of restriction and a forfeiture of $10.
you received NJP for an unauthorized absence from 4 to 11 April
The punishment imposed was a
1966, a period of 7 days.
reduction to private, a forfeiture of $25 and 30 days of
restriction.

On 2 July 1966 you were convicted by a summary court-martial of
two periods of unauthorized absence totaling 35 days, failure to
obey stragglers orders and breaking restriction.
sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days and a
forfeiture of $60.
approved the findings and sentence but remitted the unexecuted
portion of the sentence.

the convening authority

Subsequently,

You were

After numerous congressional inquiries prior to 8 July 1966, the
battalion medical officer diagnosed you with a personality
disorder.
disqualifying for duty.

This diagnosis, however, was not considered to be

However, on 11 July 1967 you were transferred for

On 4 December 1966 to you reported for a tour of duty in
Vietnam.
medical treatment due to a hearing loss.
as to whether this condition was due to hostile or non-hostile
action.

The record is unclear

On 9 April 1968 you were convicted by a special court-martial of
six periods of unauthorized absence totaling 178 days.
sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a
forfeiture of $50 per month for six months, reduction to
private, and a bad conduct discharge.
convening authority approved the findings, but reduced the
confinement and forfeitures to a period of four months.

On 10 April 1968 the

You were

On 11 April 1968, you were referred for a psychiatric evaluation
due to your numerous periods of unauthorized absence,
congressional investigations, personality problems, and multiple
somatic complaints for which no basis could be found.
diagnosed with a situational maladjustment.
psychiatrist found that you had many personal problems,

The examining

You were

2

difficulties in getting along with people and resentment and
anger towards the Marine Corps,
mentally competent.
defect,
from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to
understand the nature of the legal proceedings against you.

He found that you were free from any mental
disease, or derangement, were able to distinguish right

but found you fit for duty and

On 5 June 1968, the Navy Board of Review affirmed the findings
and the sentence of your special court-martial.
1968, you waived your right to request restoration to duty and
requested that the bad conduct discharge be executed.
further stated that,
I cannot adjust to military life."
a bad conduct discharge.

"I want out of the military service because
On 16 July 1968 you received

On 14 June

You

On 28 March 1969, the Naval Discharge Review Board  
considered your case and concluded that the original discharge
was appropriately issued and was an accurate reflection of the
character of your service.
in 1979 and 1980,
requests for reconsideration have been denied.

Your case was reviewed by this Board
Since then several

and no relief was granted.

(NDRB)

An advisory opinion of 1 May 2002 states, in part, as follows:

. 

. 

. The service member was evaluated and treated at Naval
Hospital Bethesda in July 1967 for unilateral hearing loss
resulting from hostile action in Danang, Vietnam and was
diagnosed with situational maladjustment.

II

. 

. The service member was evaluated and treated at Naval

Hospital Portsmouth, New Hampshire in May 1968.
time there was no evidence of neurosis or psychosis.

At that

. 

II

. The petitioner is documented to have been evaluated by a
civilian psychiatrist in 1979 upon referral from his lawyer
in the context of a Social Security disability claim and
was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia.

11

..The petitioner is documented to have been evaluated and
treated in October 1999 by a civilian psychiatrist and was
diagnosed with Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, alcohol
dependence, polysubstance abuse and a not otherwise
specified personality disorder.

3

The advisory went on to state as follows:

If

. 

. There is insufficient documentation to support or reject

the diagnosis of Post-traumatic Stress Disorder.

II

. 

. There is insufficient documentation to support or deny

the petitioner's claim that Post-traumatic Stress Disorder was a
significant factor in the misconduct that led to his discharge.

limited formal education, low aptitude score, your

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors such as your age and
immaturity,
Vietnam service, and your contention that you should have
received a medical discharge because you were emotionally
unstable due to post-traumatic stress disorder.
The Board
concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your nine periods of
unauthorized absence totaling 205 days.
carefully reviewed your medical documentation and the advisory
opinion but noted that there is no evidence to show that you
were not responsible for your actions or were not competent to
stand trial for your misconduct.
concluded that you made  
become an unauthorized absentee and recharacterization of your
discharge is not warranted.
been denied.
will be furnished upon request.

The names and votes of the members of the panel

a.'knowing and rational decision to

Accordingly, your application has

Furthermore, the Board

Additionally, the Board

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken.
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
the Board.
a presumption of regularity 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 of probable material error or injustice.

it is important to keep in mind that

You are entitled to have

In this regard,

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

4