DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 8044-18 Ref: Signature Date Dear: This is in reference to your application of 21 August 2018 for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found that 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 of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2019. The names and votes of the members of the 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 of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by a mental health professional dated 19 July 2019, which was previously provided to you. You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 4 August 1969. On 9 January 1970, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for two days of unauthorized absence (UA). On 12 June 1970, you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge for the good of the service in order to avoid trial by court-martial for two periods of (UA) totaling 71 days, and breaking restriction. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you conferred with a military lawyer, were advised of your rights, and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and on 8 July 1970, you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Your request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense's 3 September 2014 memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder,” the 25 August 2017 memorandum, “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual Harassment,” and the 25 July 2018 memorandum, “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations.” A mental health professional reviewed your request for correction to your record and provided the Board with an AO regarding your assertion that you was suffering from a mental health condition during your service. The AO noted, that you denied psychiatric abnormalities in your discharge physical. In your current request for review, you submitted a personal statement that you incurred depression following your inability to deploy with your unit due to injuries. You also submitted a photocopy of a card that indicates you are a deacon in a Catholic church. No additional records were available for review. You have submitted no medical information confirming a diagnosis of depression. Your service medical record do support your physical injuries incurred at the beginning of your enlistment. However, a decision to go UA could result from many factors. In-service, you were diagnosed with a personality disorder, which is not attributed to military service and could account for your misconduct. The AO opined that additional, post-service medical records describing your mental health diagnosis and the specific link between your symptoms and misconduct are required to render an opinion. The AO concluded that there is insufficient evidence to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition incurred during military service. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your record of service, and desire to upgrade your discharge. The Board also consider your assertions that, one day you were performing PT when your Drill Sergeant came up and kicked your hand, yelling that you were doing them wrong, that you ended up going to the hospital and found out that your hand was broken. Further you state, that while you were in a medical unit, you injured your left knee, and were stuck there when the rest of your unit was transferred to their permanent duty stations. You went into a depression because you were not leaving with your unit, all that you could think about was going home, and when your request for leave was denied you left. The Board concluded these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant changing your characterization of service given your misconduct, which resulted in NJP, the referral of charges to a court-martial and your request for discharge. The Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge was approved. Further, the Board concurred with the AO’s statement that there is insufficient evidence to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition incurred during military service. 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 the submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149. New matters are those not previously presented to or 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,