DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 6681-17 MAR 08 2019 Dear This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the 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 of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 November 2018. The names and votes of the members of the panel 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, applicable statutes, regulations, and policies, and the enclosed mental health advisory opinion (AO) dated 4 December 2017, which was previously provided to you. Although you were afforded an opportunity to submit a rebuttal to the AO, you did not do so. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 28 April 1986. Before you enlisted, you were granted a waiver for alcohol and drug abuse. You served for nearly six months without disciplinary incident, but, during the period from 16 October 1986 to 29 October 1987, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions and were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM). Your offenses were drunk and disorderly conduct, using provoking speech and gestures, resisting apprehension, failure to obey a lawful order, unauthorized absence (UA) for periods totaling 103 days, missing ship's movement, and failure to go at the prescribed time to your appointed place of duty. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, at which time you waived your rights to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Your commanding officer recommended that you be discharged by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed that you be separated by reason of misconduct with an OTH characterization of service. You were discharged on 15 January 1988. You request an upgrade to your discharge characterization on the basis that you suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) at the time of your military service. Your request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the 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 of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual Harassment" memorandum of 25 August 2017. A qualified mental health professional also reviewed your request and provided the Board with an AO dated 4 December 2017 regarding your assertion that you suffered from PTSD. The AO noted that, although you stated that you began to experience symptoms of PTSD after the 22 September 1986 collision between the USS and the USS , there were no personnel injuries or casualties, and both ships incurred only minor damages and were fully operational. You claimed that, after this incident, you began to experience nightmares, irritability, exaggerated startle, insomnia, and anxiety. You also claimed that you started drinking alcohol to cope with your PTSD symptoms, which contributed to your misconduct. The AO also noted that you said that, in July 1987, you viewed the severely damaged remains of the USS being towed in the after missiles damaged the ship and killed 37 crew members, which exacerbated your anxiety. The AO further noted that, before your enlistment, during the period from 1982 to 1984 you were charged with assault and battery, three different instances of driving under the influence (DUI), contempt of court, and parole violation. Although you claimed that you abused alcohol to cope with the PTSD symptoms, the record indicates you abused alcohol before your enlistment. Moreover, your discharge medical exam was negative for PTSD symptoms and noted "trouble sleeping related to stress," which could be explained by your discharge and alcohol abuse. On 17 October 2017, 29 years after discharge, an outpatient psycruatric evaluation included a diagnosis of PTSD, alcohol-use disorder, cocaine use disorder, and amphetamine-use disorder. Another psycruatrist note observed that your PTSD stems from "collision while at sea with giant explosion, being under fire for two hours in during military career and witnessing physical/sexual abuse of fellow inmates while incarcerated." The AO concluded that that there is insufficient evidence to support your contention that you had PTSD at the time of the service. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your post-service conduct, the AO, and your contention that you suffered from undiagnosed PTSD while in the Navy. The Board, however, concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct, which resulted in two NJPs and a SPCM conviction and which included a period of UA totaling more than three months. Further, the Board noted that you waived the right to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better characterization of service. In regard to your contention, the Board concurred with the AO that there is insufficient evidence to support your claim of in-service PTSD. Even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board, in its review, discerned no impropriety or inequity in the discharge. It is regretted that the circumstances of your 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 of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. Sincerely, Executive Director