Docket No: 2607-20 
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 limitation 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 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 23 April 1983.  Between 3 April 1985 and 25 April 1985, you were counseled on three separate occasions regarding your military appearance and military bearing.  On 13 June 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment for disobeying a lawful order and theft of another’s personal property.  On 18 June 1985, you were evaluated by the mental health clinic after disclosing suicidal thoughts and recommended for administrative separation for personality disorder.  Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of unsatisfactory performance.  After you waived your rights, the discharge authority directed discharge with a general, under honorable conditions (GEN), character of service by reason of unsatisfactory performance.  On 2 July 1985, you received a GEN discharge. 
 
The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case.  These included, but were not limited to, your contention that you were “going through a very rough patch” when you were discharged.  Specifically, the Board considered your contention that your father’s death in 1982 still deeply affected you emotionally, you struggled to learn your rate, and had received poor evaluations.  You further explained that you were “feeling a bit suicidal, thinking there was no escape” so when presented with the opportunity to receive a GEN discharge, you opted to separate from the Navy and return home to .  The Board noted you did not provide any post-service documentation or advocacy letters in support of your request for an upgraded characterization of service.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that based on your performance and your final military bearing mark of 2.0, your time in service is appropriately characterized.   
 
In reviewing the circumstances of your separation and characterization of service, the Board considered the totality of the circumstances to determine whether relief is appropriate today in the interests of justice in accordance with guidance provided by the Wilkie Memo.  Accordingly, the Board considered and acknowledged your positive contributions to the Navy, the length of your active duty service to our nation, and your post-discharge achievements.  Even considering these potentially mitigating factors in accordance with the above referenced guidance, the Board did not find that relief was in the interest of justice.  The Board concluded that your OTH discharge characterization was issued without error or injustice, and that corrective action is not warranted. 
 
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,