DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 8431-20 
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.
 
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 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 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, and 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 4 May 2021, which was previously provided to you, your rebuttal to the AO dated 17 May 2021, and the AO in response to your rebuttal dated 26 May 2011. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 25 September 2001. On 13 December 2002, you receive nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence, and failure to obey an order or regulation. Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge. On 20 May 2005, you received NJP for failure to obey an order. On 21 May 2005, you were notified of administrative discharge action by reason of a pattern of misconduct. On 31 May 2005, your case was forwarded to the separation authority stating in part, that you had been afforded every opportunity to succeed with the overwhelming support of the command, but you blatantly disregarded every attempt to conform to Navy standards. The recommendation was approved, and on 10 June 2005, you were discharged from the Navy with a General characterization of service. 

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 the preponderance of available objective evidence failed to establish your in-service misconduct could be mitigated by your mental health condition. On 17 May 2021, you submitted a rebuttal to the AO, providing three pages from your military medical record noting that you were referred for a mental health consult in March of 2002. The additional information revealed that you were referred for a mental health consult in March of 2002, after you reported to medical with complaints of adjusting to military life and wanting out of the Navy. You were diagnosed with Occupational Stressors, and it was recommended that you speak with the career counselor about attending a different school. Your mental health symptoms during service were considered situational and not severe enough to influence your daily functioning. The AO of 26 May 2021 again concluded that there remains a lack of objective evidence that your misconduct arose from a mental health condition, and the preponderance of available evidence failed to establish that your in-service misconduct was mitigated by these mental health conditions. 

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 believe your service-connected Major Depressive Disorder contributed to the bad decisions you made, and led to your discharge. You claim you battled depression all through your service, it was difficult to go to work and adapt, and you were irritable many days, which led to verbal conflicts with your peers. 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, and the fact that you were warned of the consequences of further misconduct after your first NJP, 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, 
7/19/2021