DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 8679-20 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 limitation was waived in accordance with the 25 August 2017 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, sexual assault, or sexual harassment (Kurta Memo). A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 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, including 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 reviewed an 8 May 2021 advisory opinion (AO) from a mental health professional, as well as your 1 June 2021 response to same. You enlisted in the Navy and commenced a period of active duty on 26 August 1977. On 16 January 1980, you received nonjudicial punishment for striking a senior petty officer. On 26 November 1980, you received nonjudicial punishment for using marijuana, and you received a written warning concerning your misconduct. On 26 June 1981, you were convicted by a special court-martial for being disrespectful to a commissioned officer on two occasions, disobeying an order on two occasions, being disrespectful to a petty officer, using provoking words, assault, and communicating a threat on two occasions. Your sentence included a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 7 December 1982, you were discharged with a BCD. In 1983, your mother filed an application for review of your discharge with the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB). In support of the application, your mother explained, among other things, that something changed in you when you joined the Navy. The NDRB denied the application explaining that it found that the BCD was equitable as issued. The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors in your petition to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case including in accordance with the Wilkie Memo. You contend in your petition that you suffered undue stress caused by the great danger that you and your shipmates faced while deployed to Iran during the Iranian Crisis, and this caused your judgment to become temporarily impaired. You also contend that several doctors determined that you suffered from what we now know as PTSD, and that, before your deployment, your commanding officer had made several commendations on your record, noting that you were a fine seaman and a gifted leader. In light of your assertion of a mental health condition, the Board received, and reviewed, the 8 May 2021 AO and your response to the AO. The AO reviewed your naval records as well as all of the materials that you submitted, and explained as follows: Petitioner’s in-service records did not contain evidence of a diagnosis of a mental health condition. Petitioner underwent at least one assessment in May of 1981 and no evidence of a mental health condition was noted. Although Petitioner contended he suffered from PTSD and his behavior was the result of undue stress during the Iranian Crisis, he provided no information (i.e., description of symptoms, purported trauma) which indicated his situation was extraordinary or unique. The AO concluded, “it is my considered medical opinion the preponderance of available objective evidence failed to establish Petitioner was diagnosed with a mental health condition, suffered from a mental health condition at the time of his military service, or his inservice misconduct could be mitigated by a mental health condition.” In response to the AO, you explained that, upon your return from being deployed you learned that your grandfather recently passed away, that your brother had been killed in car accident, and that your mother was also hospitalized. You further explained that upon learning this, you requested emergency leave and your request was denied. You contend that these factors contributed to your asserted mental health condition. In review of all of your materials, the Board did not find an injustice in your record warranting relief. The Board concurred with the finding of the AO, and determined that your response to the AO did not change their opinion. In conclusion, given the totality of the circumstances, as well as a review of your overall service record, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 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, 7/7/2021 Executive Director