Docket No:  6235-20 
           

Dear Petitioner: 
 
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 23 June 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 18 April 2021, which was previously provided to you. 
 
You entered a period of active duty in the Navy on 20 August 1992.  On 4 September 1992 you were evaluated and diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder, attributed to stress and the requirements of a military training environment.  You exhibited emotional distress from your training environment “as characterized by agitation, staring, appearing confused, social withdrawal” and you were hospitalized for observation.  You stabilized during your brief hospitalization and were discharged to your command.  On 17 September 1992 you were notified of administrative separation processing which could result in an entry level separation due to entry level performance and conduct.  The same day you waived your procedural right to consult with counsel and did not object to the discharge.  On 7 October 1992 you were discharged with an entry level separation. 
 
You contend you were hospitalized prior to discharge and your records show you had an acute mental health crisis at the time. You state this condition resulted in you not being able to finish boot camp.  You further state you were barely stabilized and then released without any care or documentation.  You contend that within days of your return home you were forcefully committed to a state hospital.  You state that you have long since recovered and have led a full and productive life with stable employment. 
 
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.  The AO noted that while you contend you suffered from mental health issues, you do not provide any evidence of psychological symptoms suffered during your enlistment, or post-discharge clinical diagnosis of a mental health condition to support your claim.  Accordingly, the AO concluded that the preponderance of objective evidence fails to establish you suffered from an unfitting mental health condition at the time of your military service, or that your in-service performance and conduct could be attributed to an unfitting mental health condition.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded that these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that the evidence submitted insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice, and the circumstances of your discharge outweighed these mitigating factors.  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, 
									      7/9/2021
                                                                              Executive Director