DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 6525-20 Dear : 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. The Board determined that your 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. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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 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 20 April 2021, which was previously provided to you. You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 23 July 1986. On 12 February and 5 March 1987 you were counseled concerning being absent from your appointed place of duty, and being out in town in town in an unauthorized uniform. Additionally on both occasions you were warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. On 14 December 1987, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for possession of cocaine and wrongful use of marijuana. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. On 24 December 1987, a staff judge advocate found your case to be sufficient in law and fact. Subsequently, on 28 December 1987, your request for discharge was granted and it was directed that you be discharged from the Marine Corps with an OTH characterization of service. On 20 January 1988, you began a period of unauthorized absence that lasted 15 days, ending on 4 February 1988. On 25 February 1988, you received NJP for 15 days of UA. Subsequently, you received your OTH discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial on 4 March 1988. As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor. 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 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder during your service. The AO noted that based on the available evidence, the preponderance of objective evidence failed to establish you suffered from a 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 you are a Camp Lejeune veteran from 1986 and need medical assistance, that you never saw a review board before your discharge, your discharge is socially, economically, and psychologically affecting your life, and you would have stayed in if you knew the stigma you would have faced. Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief. Specifically, the Board determined that the fact you were counseled and warned of the consequences of further misconduct on more than one occasion, the referral of charges to a court-martial, wrongful use and possession of drugs, and request for outweighed these mitigating factors. Additionally, the Board concurred with the AO that based on the available evidence, the preponderance of objective evidence failed to establish you suffered from a 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, 6/25/2021 Executive Director