DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 7999-20 9751-18 Ref: Signature Date 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. Because your application was submitted with new evidence not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your application. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 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 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 14 June 2021 and your rebuttal response to the AO. In response to the new supporting documentation, an additional AO was requested and received on 23 July 2021. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 22 October 1992. On 29 June 1996, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use of marijuana. Unfortunately, the documents related to your administrative separation are not in your official military personnel file. However, your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), reveals that you were separated from the Navy on 29 July 1996, with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service, your narrative reason for separation is “Misconduct due to Drug Abuse,” your separation code is “HKK,” and your reenlistment code is “RE-4.” As part of the Board’s review, on 14 June 2021, a qualified mental health professional reviewed your request and provided the Board with an AO. The AO opined that the preponderance of objective evidence failed to establish you were diagnosed with a mental health condition (other than Alcohol Dependence), suffered from a mental health condition at the time of your military service, or that your in-service misconduct could be attributed to a mental health condition. In response to your submission of new supporting documentation, the mental health professional reviewed your request and provided the Board with an additional AO on 23 July 2021. The AO noted the additional rebuttal evidenced received and the clinical psychologist remarks. The AO further noted that the clinical psychologist diagnosed you with PTSD, Persistent Depressive Disorder, Anxiety Disorder (Unspecified), Psychological Factors Affecting Medical Condition, and Alcohol Use Disorder (Episodic, Currently in Remission). The clinical psychologist reported your primary trauma was childhood sexual assault at age 5-6, with marked traumatic events experienced in your post-discharge career as a firefighter. He characterized your mental health history as “complex.” The clinical psychologist further noted you reported that during your naval service, you were stationed on an aircraft carrier in the shipyard undergoing maintenance and that the environment was “traumatic” in that it was “noisy, dirty” with the crew experiencing “poor morale.” The clinical psychologist reported that you did not experience any events, which would meet the criteria for PTSD. The majority of the evaluation focused on your post-discharge and the evolution of your mental health conditions, especially with increased depressive, anxiety, and PTSD symptoms from your childhood sexual abuse and traumatic events in your job as a firefighter, and as it related to your Workman’s Compensation Claim. The AO concluded by again opining that the preponderance of objective evidence failed to establish you were diagnosed with a mental health condition (other than Alcohol Dependence), suffered from a mental health condition at the time of your military service, or that your in-service misconduct could be attributed to a mental health condition. The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contentions that: 1) the missing documents represent a departure from regularity and must be considered; 2) you cannot personally recall appearing before any board; 3) the condition of the ship during overhaul, and the fact that there are documents missing by the Navy’s admission should constitute an injustice; 4) two healthcare providers have stated that you meet the criteria for PTSD, with one noting contributing issues from before your Naval service; and 5) in the interest of justice it should be considered the perception of cannabis is changing. Your further contend that it is patently observable societally and in the military that alcohol has had far more devastating and widespread effects than cannabis. After careful consideration of both advisory opinions, unfortunately, even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board discerned no procedural defect, impropriety, or inequity in your discharge and determined your service was appropriately characterized as other than honorable. The Board concluded there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice that warrants upgrading your characterization of service. 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 desire to upgrade your discharge and contentions discussed above. Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief. Specifically, the Board determined your misconduct 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, 8/19/2021 Executive Director