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.   
 
A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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 25 August 2017 guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (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 your 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 your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You originally enlisted in the Navy on 21 March 2016.  Your pre-enlistment medical history and physical examination noted no neurological or psychiatric conditions or symptoms.  On or about 27 October 2016 you were dropped and processed out of BUD/S training following an injury and assigned to Training Support Center, .   
 
On 27 April 2017 you underwent a mental health evaluation at the Fleet Mental Health Unit, .  The Medical Officers diagnosed you with an   adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, and noted that you had ongoing depressed mood and anxiety in the context of military service.  The Medical Officers noted that your symptoms improve when you are away from the military environment and worsen when you return to the military setting.  The Medical Officers determined that there was no evidence of mental defect, emotional illness, or psychiatric disorder, and that you were mentally responsible for your behavior.  The Medical Officers recommended your administrative separation for unsuitability because your condition was of such severity that your ability to function safely, reliably, and effectively in the military environment was significantly impaired.   
 
On 3 May 2017 you personally routed a written request to your commanding officer requesting an administrative separation based on physical or behavioral conditions not amounting to a disability, namely, your diagnosed adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood.  In the interim, your separation physical on 30 May 2017 found you medically qualified for separation.  Additionally, you underwent a head CT scan on 13 June 2017 and the results were clear, unremarkable, and normal.  The CT scan indicated there was no evidence of acute intracranial process, which meant that there was nothing critically wrong with you.  Ultimately, on 15 June 2017 you were discharged from the Navy for a condition (not a disability) with an honorable characterization of service and assigned an RE-4 reentry code.  In this regard, you were assigned the correct characterization, narrative reason, and reentry code based on your factual situation. 
 
On 21 May 2018 the Board denied your initial petition for relief.  On 20 November 2018 the Naval Discharge Review Board denied your application.  On 20 June 2019 the Board denied your reconsideration petition. 
 
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) you suffered a concussion at BUD/S training and was not diagnosed or treated properly, (b) your concussion is no longer there which should lead to an RE-1 code, (c) your narrative reason should change to concussion/TBI because the adjustment disorder you were diagnosed with was inaccurate, and (d) the administrative information on your DD Form 214 in several places was not accurate when it was processed.  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 concluded that there was no convincing evidence that you suffered from any type of traumatic brain injury (TBI) while on active duty, or that any such TBI or mental health condition was related to the underlying reason forming the basis of your discharge request.  As a result, the Board concluded that your discharge was not due to TBI or related symptoms.  The Board observed that your June 2017 head CT scan on active duty was normal and noted no TBI or residual effects from any concussion.  The Board also determined that the evidence of record did not demonstrate that you were not mentally responsible for your conduct or that you should otherwise not be held accountable for your actions.       
 
The Board determined that your Navy service records and DD Form 214 maintained by the Department of the Navy (DoN) contain no known errors.  Upon your separation you were assigned an RE-4 reentry code and narrative reason for separation of “condition, not a disability.”  In this regard, you were assigned the correct reentry code and narrative reason for separation based on your precise factual situation.  Additionally, absent a material error or injustice, the Board generally will not summarily make corrections to service records solely for the purpose of facilitating VA benefits, or enhancing educational or employment opportunities.  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.  The Board also concluded you received the correct reentry code and narrative reason for separation based on the totality of your circumstances, and that such discharge action was in accordance with all DoN directives and policy at the time of your separation.     
 
Regarding your request for administrative changes to your awards record and DD Form 214, the Board determined you failed to exhaust your administrative remedies.  Board regulations require that you exhaust your administrative remedies prior to applying to this Board for relief.  You must first submit your request to Navy Personnel Command (PERS 312A), 5720 Integrity Drive, Millington, TN 38055-3120 to request they make the administrative changes you seek to have made to your military record.  If the Navy determines no change to your record is required, you may submit an application for correction to this Board with the Navy’s response with evidence that supports your assertion that an error or injustice exists in your record. 
 
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,