DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

JRE
Docket No: 75  
23 January 2002

18-00

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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 17 January 2002. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board.
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your
naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board
considered the advisory opinion furnished by designees of the Specialty Leader for Psychiatry
dated 13 August 2001, a copy of which is attached, and the information you submitted in
response thereto.

Documentary material considered by the Board

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. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained
in the advisory opinion.
It was not persuaded that you suffered from post traumatic stress
disorder during your service in the Marine Corps, or that your misconduct was related or
attributable to the effects of such a disorder.
The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

Accordingly, your application has been denied.

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 matter not previously considered by the Board. 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 of an official naval record, the
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHIATRY

NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER

PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA 23708-2197

6520
0506:
SLB-0834
13 August 2001

From :
To:

Subj:

Ref:

Encl:

Case Reviewers
Chairman,
Department of the Navy, Washington, D.C. 20370-2179

Board for Correction of Naval Records,

REQUEST
OF;

FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

IN THE CASE

(a) Your letter dated 05 JULY 2001

(1) BCNR file
(2)  Service Record

Pursuant to reference (a) a review of enclosures 

1 .
was conducted to form opinions about petitioner's claim that he was
suffering from Posttraumatic Stress Disorder at the time of his
discharge from the Marine Corps.
2.

Facts of the case:

(1) and 

(2)

He completed recruit training and

when he received nonjudicial punishment

a. The patient enlisted in the Marine Corps on 14 April 1966
at the age of 18 years.
served in the Marine Corps without incident until 11 December
1968,
disobedience and was awarded a $10 forfeiture of pay.
February 1969 the patient received NJP and was awarded a
forfeiture of $25 for failure to go to his appointed place of
duty.
On 12 February 1969 he received additional NJP for
disobedience.

(NJP)  for
On 04

The patient received his fourth NJP on 24 April 1969, as

b.
well as a reduction in rank to E-2,
the performance of his duties, as a result of alcohol
intoxication.
summary court-martial (SCM) for three periods of unauthorized
absence 
in forfeitures as well as confinement at hard labor for 30
days.

On 23 September 1969, he was convicted by

He was awarded a total of $109

(UA)  totaling 66 days.

for being incapacitated in

On  17 November 1969,

C .
of UA, which ended after he was apprehended by the FBI on 24
March 1970.
undesirable discharge

On 06 May 1970 he submitted a request for

in order to

avoid trial by

the patient began a 

127-day  period

 

court-
 

Subj:

REQUEST

FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

IN THE

CASE

martial.
June 1970 the patient was discharged from the Marine Corps.

This request was granted on 26 May 1970, and on 05

the patient was evaluated by a physician on 11

Several references to a medical/psychiatric evaluation

d.
prior to discharge exist in the patient's service record.
According to reviews of the patient's discharge performed in
1973  and 1977,
May 1970.
evidence
neurosis"
that the patient had a 
evidence of this consultation has been found in the patient's
service record or accompanying documentation.

At the time this evaluation was performed,  

of mental incompetence,

w character disorder."

The consultant's impression was

was uncovered.

psychosis,

n no
or disabling

No other

On 03 December 1973,

e.
the Navy Discharge Review Board
(NDRB)  considered the patient's request for an upgrade of his
discharge.
be changed, corrected,
equitably issued."

The NDRB concluded that the discharge 

or modified because it was properly and

n should not

under the 

DOD  Special Discharge

On 22 April 1977,

the patient applied for an upgrade of

The patient's request was granted, and
the SDRP upgraded the discharge to a

f.
his undesirable discharge
Review Program (SDRP) .
on 16 June 1977,
n general discharge under honorable conditions."
communication from the NDRB, dated 07 November 1979, indicates
that the NDRB was directed by the Naval Complaints Review
Board 
discharge.
u 
n other than honorable"

with the patient's service characterized as
due to his extended periods of UA.

SDRP's  upgrade of the patient's

(NCRB)  to modify the 

general/SDRP,"

classified as

discharge

now

The

was

Subsequent

On 27 October 1999,

the patient submitted an application
At that time, he

In his application,

g-
for correction of military records.
indicated that his discharge was characterized as 
honorable."
he had been granted an honorable discharge by the Department
of the Navy, but that this decision was reversed by the Marine
Corps.
of his discharge.
request was denied by the Board for Correction of Military
Records (BCNR).
to the patient dated 01 May 2000 whether the 
issued under the 
discharge under honorable conditions or a general discharge
under other than honorable conditions.

It is unclear from the 
SDRP"

He requested an 

m upgrade"

which was referenced was a general

the patient contended that

BCNR's  communication
n discharge, as

n other than

This

2

Subj: RE
OF

SE

the patient

On 27 October 2000,

h.
application
application,
as
contended that the disciplinary problems, which led to his
undesirable discharge,
sustained during his tour of duty in Vietnam.

for correction of military records.
he indicated that his discharge was characterized
In this second application, the patient

were the result of psychological trauma

n undesirable."

submitted a second

In this

to documentation
MD,

supplied by
the patient

raumatic  Stress Disorder

 

(PTSD).  Mr.

indicated that the patient's persistently intrusive

thoughts about Vietnam eventually led to his misbehavior and
subsequent separation from the Marine Corps. Dr. Antonucci
wrote that the patient
stressor  acutely"
PTSD the patient experienced immediately following his return
from Vietnam.

but did not specify what manifestations of

hx of reaction to the

n has the  

3.

THE FOLLOWING OPINIONS ARE SUBMITTED

His combat

According to documentation submitted by the patient, he

as well as engendering feelings of
According to documentation from Mr.
the patient continues to revisit
and manifest hyperarousal and

a.
presently meets criteria for chronic PTSD.
experiences in Vietnam exposed him to a real threat of bodily
harm and possible death,
helplessness and fear.
Charette and Dr. Antonucci,
those traumatic experiences
avoidance behaviors.
b. Mr.
documentation that the patient manifested symptoms of PTSD
immediately following his return from Vietnam, and that these
symptoms led to the patient's undesirable discharge in 1970.
No documentation of a psychiatric evaluation prior to the
patient's discharge has been made available,
difficult to corroborate this assertion.
an examination is the statement,
Surgeon, that
or disabling neurosis"

n no evidence of mental incompetence, psychosis,

The only evidence of
attributed to the Regimental

indicate in

was uncovered.

and Dr.

making it

their

There

also

C .
contradicting
factor in the patient's misbehavior.

the assumption

items in

exist

the

patient's

record

that PTSD was a significant

Prior to his 

127-day

3

Subj:

REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE CASE
OF

the patient attempted to obtain emergency leave

period of UA,
in order to address family issues.
detailed his rationale for requesting leave as well as for
early release from the Marine Corps.
any sort of distress resulting from his combat experience in
that note,
UA.
about the possibility of changing his reenlistment code in
order to permit reenlistment in the Marine Corps.

nor did he mention his distress upon return from
ten years following his discharge, he inquired

In fact,

The patient extensively

He made no mention of

The patient's PTSD appears to be the

The diagnosis of chronic PTSD is substantiated by the

d.
documentation provided.
result of the patient's Vietnam combat experiences.
clear whether the patient was experiencing PTSD during 1968 to
1970,
and it is not known how great a factor the patient's
symptoms would have been in influencing his behavior during
that time if he had been symptomatic.
by avoidance behaviors,
with the diagnosis of PTSD; however,
a characteristic persons with a  

and periods of UA are not inconsistent

\\ character disorder."

It is not

PTSD is characterized

avoidance of duty is also

This review was

e.
under the supervision of

con

USN

DR MC

USN

4