Docket No: 4712-20 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 21 May 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, an Advisory Opinion (AO) from a qualified mental health provider, 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 determined that Petitioner’s personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered Petitioner’s case based on the evidence of record. You enlisted in the Navy on 23 April 2001. Your pre-enlistment physical on 22 March 2001 and self-reported medical history both noted no psychiatric or neurologic conditions, symptoms, or history. On 23 May 2001 you underwent a psychiatric evaluation at . Based on information you revealed during your evaluation, the Medical Officer (MO) determined that you had been exposed to traumatic events in which you were confronted by actual or threatened death or serious injury or threat to physical integrity, and that your response involved intense fear, helplessness, or horror. The MO noted that you were sexually abused by your older brother for several years, and severely physically and verbally abused by your father. The MO also noted that you had suicidal ideation and had cut yourself to distract yourself from distressing thoughts of the abuse. The MO diagnosed you with “post-traumatic stress disorder, existed prior to entry (EPTE).” The MO noted that since arriving at initial recruit training you experienced intense emotional distress with an exacerbation of your PTSD symptoms. The MO recommended your administrative entry level separation (ELS) due to your disqualifying psychiatric condition affecting your potential for performance of expected duties and responsibilities while on active duty. On 30 May 2001 your command provided you notice that you were being administratively processed for an ELS from the Navy by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to an erroneous enlistment as evidenced by your pre-service PTSD. You elected in writing to waive your rights to consult with counsel, submit a written statement to the separation authority, and to General Court-Martial Convening Authority review of your separation. Ultimately, on 5 June 2001 you were discharged from the Navy with an uncharacterized ELS discharge given your length of service and assigned an RE-4 reentry code. In this regard, you were assigned the correct characterization and reentry code based on your factual situation. As part of the review process, the Board’s Physician Advisor who is also a medical doctor (MD) and a Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association, reviewed your mental health contentions and the available records, and issued an AO dated 4 April 2021. The MD initially observed that your in-service records contained a PTSD EPTE diagnosis that was properly documented in your medical record, with an appropriate recommendation for ELS due to a medically disqualifying condition. That MD determined that your history presented in your petition was consistent with your medical record and confirmed your PTSD from sexual molestation prior to enlistment that was triggered by an inappropriate cadence from a male recruit. The MD concluded by opining that the preponderance of evidence established that you were appropriately diagnosed with PTSD EPTE, and that your ELS discharge was appropriate for your medically disqualifying condition. The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case in accordance with the Kurta, Hagel, and Wilkie Memos. These included, but were not limited to: (a) that you were not diagnosed with PTSD prior to enlistment, (b) events while at initial recruit training triggered reactive symptoms, (c) under the presumption of soundness you were enlisted into the Navy and you were medically and physically capable of serving this country, (d) the aggravation “trigger” should not have presented itself, (e) had the Navy separated the sexes during initial recruit training you would have never had to experience the stressor and completed your contract, (f) the misconduct of another Sailor caused you to act out of character and cost you your military career, and (g) you have experienced years of mental anguish and detriment to your physical health. However, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief. In accordance with the Kurta, Hagel, and Wilkie Memos, 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, the Board concurred with the AO and concluded that you were appropriately separated with an ELS because you clearly had a disqualifying medical condition upon entry into the Navy. Moreover, the Board noted that separations initiated within the first 180 days of continuous active duty will be described as ELS except when an honorable discharge is approved by the Secretary of the Navy in cases involving unusual circumstances not applicable in your case. The Board carefully considered any matters submitted regarding your post-service conduct and accomplishments, however, even in light of the Wilkie Memo and reviewing the record holistically, the Board still concluded that given the totality of the circumstances your request does not merit relief. 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 conduct clearly merited your receipt of an ELS, and that such characterization was proper and in compliance with all Navy directives and policy at the time of your discharge. 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, 5/26/2021 Executive Director