DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 5206-20 Ref: Signature Date Dear Petitioner: 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. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 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 the 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 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a qualified mental health professional dated 3 April 2021, which was previously provided to you. You enlisted in the Navy Reserve and were recalled to active duty on 21 August 1985. On 13 January 1986, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA). Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. On 20 June 1986, you received NJP for two specifications of UA totaling three days, disobeying a lawful order, failure to obey an order, and making racial slurs. On 5 July 1986, you were notified of administrative discharge action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. After being advised of your procedural rights, you elected to waive your right to have your case be heard before an administrative discharge board. On 7 July 1986, you were diagnosed with a Personality Disorder, Antisocial, Paranoid Ideations. On 8 July 1986, your case was forwarded to the separation authority stating, in part, that you were “not suited for military life” and “a disruptive influence” in your division, and noting that it would not be in the best interest of the naval service to retain you in the service. It was recommended that you receive an other than honorable (OTH) discharge. On 13 July 1986, the separation authority directed that you receive an OTH discharge. On 18 July 1986, you were discharged from the Navy with an OTH characterization of service by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. Your request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense’s Memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder” of 3 September 2014 and the "Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Board 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" memorandum of 25 August 2017. A qualified mental health professional reviewed your request for correction to your record and provided the Board with an AO regarding your assertion that you were suffering from a mental health condition during your service. The AO noted that based on the available evidence, the preponderance of objective evidence established the diagnosis of personality disorder, but failed to establish you were diagnosed with any other mental health condition, suffered from any other mental health condition at the time of your military service, or that your in-service misconduct could be mitigated by a mental health 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 Wilkie Memo. These included, but were not limited to your assertions that: (a) your diagnosed Personality Disorder gives causation to abnormal behavior that would cause disciplinary issues within any discipline structured organization such as the military; (b) when these adverse psychological behaviors were noted, you should have received treatment, you received no type of mental health treatment nor were you ever made aware of these abnormal mental disorders; and (c) you were incarcerated for 20 years and had many rule infractions, and upon your release, you maintained your lifestyle and avoided problems with law enforcement for just over three years, but are now serving a 23-year sentence, and you believe all these infractions are normal behavior for someone suffering from mental health disorders. Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief. Specifically, the Board determined that your misconduct, as evidenced by your two NJPs, outweighed these mitigating factors. Additionally, the Board concurred with the AO that the preponderance of objective evidence established the diagnosis of personality disorder, but failed to establish you were diagnosed with any other mental health condition, suffered from any other mental health condition at the time of your military service, or that your in-service misconduct could be mitigated by a mental health condition. 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, 7/20/2021 Executive Director