Docket No: 1133-20 
Ref: Signature Date 
 
Dear  
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted 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 limitations was waived in accordance with 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 7 April 2021.  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).  The Board also considered an advisory opinion (AO) from a qualified mental health professional dated 22 February 2021, which was previously provided to you.   
 
You entered a period of active duty on 9 August 1978.  On 14 May 1979 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for Article 86, unauthorized absence (UA).  On 20 May 1980 you plead guilty at a Special Court-Martial (SPCM) to a 119 day period of UA terminated by apprehension and two specifications of Article 128, assault.  You then entered additional periods of UA and were convicted at a Summary Court-Martial (SCM) for two more specifications of Article 86.  On 14 September 1981 your Commanding Officer recommended your administrative separation processing by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement with military authorities.  You waived your right to consult with counsel and were discharged on 2 October 1981 with an Other Than Honorable (OTH) characterization of service. 
 
You contend you were under a lot of stress due to an incident where you lost a child.  You were broken, had marital problems, psychological issues, and shunned your responsibilities.  You further state you are very ill from issues related to diabetes. 
 
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 contentions noted above and desire to upgrade your discharge.  The Board also relied on the AO in making its determination and noted the preponderance of available objective evidence failed to establish you were diagnosed or suffered from a mental health condition at the time of your military service, or that your in-service misconduct could be attributed to a mental health condition.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded that these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief, and specifically, the Board determined that your misconduct outweighed these mitigating factors.  Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief.  Additionally, whether or not an individual is entitled to veterans’ benefits is a matter under the cognizance of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and you may contact the nearest office of the VA concerning your right to apply for benefits.  If benefits have been denied, you may be able to appeal the denial under procedures established by the VA.  
   
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, 
5/6/2021
Executive Director