Dear :  
 
This is in reference to your application 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.   
 
Although you did not file your application in a timely manner, the statute of limitation was waived in accordance the 25 August 2017 guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Kurta Memo).  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2020.  The names and votes of the panel members 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, to include the Kurta Memo, the 3 September 2014 guidance from the Secretary of Defense regarding discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Hagel Memo), and the 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). 
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 9 September 1980.  On 8 January 1981 you reported for duty on board the USS  () in , .  On 28 January 1982 you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence.  On 15 September 1982 you received NJP for the wrongful use of a controlled substance.  On 3 November 1982 you received NJP for breaking restriction.  Following the third NJP you were issued a “Page 13” counseling warning (Page 13) expressly warning you that if your behavior did not improve, you may be processed for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for pattern of misconduct.  However, on 9 February 1983 you received NJP for the wrongful use of a controlled substance. 
 
On 11 February 1983 you were provided notice that you were being administratively processed for separation from the Navy by reason of misconduct due to:  (a) a pattern of misconduct, and (b) drug abuse.  You consulted with counsel and elected in writing to waive your rights to submit a written statement to the separation authority and to request a hearing before an administrative separation board.  Ultimately, on 21 March 1983 you were discharged from the Navy for drug abuse with an other than honorable conditions (OTH) characterization of service and assigned an RE-4 reentry code.  
 
As part of the Board review process, the Board’s Physician Advisor who is a licensed clinical psychologist (Ph.D.), reviewed your contentions that you suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other related mental health conditions, and issued an AO dated 19 October 2020.  The Ph.D. noted that your in-service records did not contain direct or indirect evidence of a PTSD diagnosis or psychological/behavioral changes indicating any mental health condition.  The Ph.D. concluded by opining that although you carry a post-discharge PTSD diagnosis, the preponderance of available objective evidence failed to establish you suffered from PTSD at the time of your military service, or that your in-service misconduct could be attributed to PTSD or other mental health conditions. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such your contentions that you suffer from PTSD and anxiety, there were a lot of things going on when you returned to the country from overseas, that you were young and new to the Navy, that you were singled out and penalized because of discrimination, and that you are very sorry for your actions.  Unfortunately, the Board concluded these mitigating factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant upgrading your discharge characterization or granting any other relief.    
 
In accordance with the published guidance, the Board gave liberal and special consideration to your record of service, and your contentions about any traumatic or stressful events you experienced and their possible adverse impact on your service.  However, even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board concluded that there was no nexus between any PTSD and/or PTSD-related symptoms and your misconduct, and determined that there was insufficient evidence to support the argument that any such mental health conditions mitigated the misconduct that formed the basis of your discharge.  Even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board concluded that your misconduct was not attributable to mental health-related conditions or symptoms.  The Board noted that the evidence of record did not demonstrate that you were not mentally responsible for your conduct or that you should not be held accountable for your actions.  Further, the Board observed the record shows you were notified of and waived your procedural rights in connection with your administrative separation. Additionally, absent a material error or injustice, the Board generally will not summarily upgrade a discharge solely for the purpose of facilitating benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs, or enhancing educational or employment opportunities.  Accordingly, the Board determined that there was no impropriety or inequity in your discharge, and even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board concluded that your serious misconduct and total disregard for good order and discipline clearly merited your receipt of an OTH.  
 
The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case in accordance with the Wilkie Memo.  These included, but were not limited to, your desire to upgrade your discharge, your character references, and your assertion that you have not had a criminal record since your discharge.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that your repeated misconduct, as evidenced by your three NJPs, outweighed these mitigating factors.  Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief.   
 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon 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,