Docket No:  8685-20 
Ref: Signature Date 
 
Dear : 
 
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.     
 
The Board determined that your personal 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. 
 
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 February 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 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). 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 30 June 1969.  On 3 March 1970, medical personnel diagnosed you with having a Passive Aggressive Personality Disorder.  On 6 April 1970, you were notified of administrative discharge action by reason of unsuitability due to your diagnosed disorder.  After being afforded your procedural rights, you elected to submit a written statement regarding your separation, stating that your unsuitability discharge was going to hurt you on the outside when you got out of the Navy in finding a job, and helping your parents at home.  On 8 April 1970, your case was forwarded to the separation authority stating in part that you had been continually failing to respond to counseling and leadership, and had demonstrated an ability to handle tasks assigned, but your poor attitude towards the command and regulations, cancelled out your otherwise acceptable performance.  Further, you had difficulty controlling your temper and frequently avoided trouble only through the patience of your superiors.  Further, you demonstrated a contempt for the personnel you worked with and acted as a deterrent to the effectiveness of the office force.  On 20 April 1970, the separation authority directed your discharge from the Navy with the type warranted by your service record.  On 23 April 1970, you received a discharge characterization of under honorable 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 never went “AWOL,” your record was changed to make you look bad, that your home was broken into and your original discharge papers were stolen, your psychosis was covered up, you could have receive medical benefits, and your excess leave was a lie and fraud.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that your diagnosed Passive Aggressive Personality Disorder and comments by your commanding officer, outweighed these mitigating factors.  The Board also noted that characterization of service is based in part on conduct (i.e., military behavior) marks assigned on a periodic basis.  Your conduct average was 2.4.  At the time of your service, a conduct average of 3.0 was required to be considered for a fully honorable characterization of service.  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,