DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
 
Docket No: 100-17 
JUN 20 2018 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions ofTitle 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious 
consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to 
establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application 
has been denied. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of 
justice to waive the statute oflimitations and consider your application on its merits. A threemember 
panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 16 April 2018. The names and votes of the members of the panel 
will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror 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, Advisory 
Opinion (AO) dated 21 February 2018, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

You enlisted in the Navy on 30 July 1997. On 6 July 1999, you were convicted by special court 
martial (SPCM) ofthe following offenses: three specifications of UA totaling 38 days, two 
specifications of failure to go to appointed place ofduty, willfully disobeyed a superior officer, 
insubordinate conduct, and three specifications of failure to obey an order or regulation. 
Subsequently, you were notified ofpending administrative separation action by reason of 
misconduct due to commission ofa serious offence. After you waived your procedural rights, 
your Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable (OTH) 
conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offence. The discharge 
authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable 
conditions by reason of misconduct. On 19 August 1999, you were discharged. 

Your contention that you suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was fully and 
carefully considered by the Board in light ofthe 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 ofMilitary/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans 
for Modification oftheir Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual 
Harassment" memorandum of 25 August 2017. 

An Advisory Opinion also reviewed your request for correction to your record and provided the 
Board with an AO dated 21 February 2018 regarding your assertion of suffering from PTSD. 
The AO noted that you claimed your misconduct was the result ofmental distress due to your 
mother's death. On 24 May 1999, a psychologist aboard the USS        diagnosed 
you with "Phase of Life" and noted you had difficulties in the Navy since the death of your 
mother. On 6 August 2011,       diagnosed you with schizophrenia. The AO noted that 
there is no history or background associated with the diagnosis, which stated that you 
experienced "some hallucinations, no delusions." There is no evidence that your post-service 
diagnosis ofschizophrenia attributed to your military service. The AO also noted that your 
period of misconduct began six months after the death of your mother. While you were very 
likely distressed by your mother's death, your absences from the ship was not immediately 
following her death, but began at a later time. Based on the preponderance of the evidence, it 
was the AO's opinion that there is insufficient evidence to support your contention that you were 
suffering from a mental health condition at the time of your service in the Navy. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as the AO, psychological 
evaluation, diagnoses of Schizophrenia, and contention of PTSD as a reason for your 
misconduct. The Board also noted that you failed to provide a rebuttal to the AO supporting 
your claim of PTSD to the Board. The Board concurred with the A O's statement that there was 
insufficient evidence to support your contention that you had service connected PTSD which 
contributed to your misconduct and discerned no impropriety or inequity in your discharge. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are such that favorable action cannot be taken 
at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision.upon the submission of 
new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously 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 ofan official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director