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

Docket No: 9201-17 
MAY 14 2019 


Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful 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 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 19 February 2019. 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, a 24 April 2018 Advisory Opinion (AO), as well as applicable statues, regulations, and policies.

You reenlisted in the Navy on 31 October 1988. During the period from 21 April 1989 to 24 October 1991, you received four non-judicial punishments (NJP) for two instances of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling four days, missing ship's movement, assualt and battery, and making a false official statement. Subsequently, you were notified of the initiation of administrative separation process by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and you were advised of your rights associated with administrative processing. After you waived your rights, your commanding officer (CO) recommended that you be discharged with an  other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed that you be separated under OTH conditions by reason of misconduct. You were discharged on 9 May 1992.

Your contention that you suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was fully 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 2 September 2014, and the "Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Board and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Consdering 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 provider reviewed your request and provided the Board with an AO dated 24 April 2018. The AO addressed your contention that you had PTSD at your time of service, which mitifated your misconduct that ultimately led to your OTH characterization of service. According to the AO, a comprehensive review of your records revealed that you had no mental health treatment or diagnosis of any kind while you were in the Navy, and, as such, a formal diagnosis cannot be rendered. The AO further stated that your record contains no documentation to support your sstatement that you were treated at the Department of Veterans Affairs in      . The AO concluded that your service record does not indicate behaviors associated with PTSD, and thus your misconduct cannot be attributed to PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder.

The Board weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as the letter from     , the note from American Airlines, your desire to upgrade your character of service, and your contention that PTSD contributed to your misconduct. The Board also considered your contention that you were denied your constitutional rights, due process, had no legal representation and your executive officer (XO) gave you a direct order to sign papers dismissing your NJP appeal and agreeing to an OTH discharge. However, the Board noted, that, despite having been provided a copy of the AO, you did not provide any material in rebuttal to the AO to support claim of PTSD. The Board concurred with the AO's statement that there was insufficient disorder. The Board concluded, therefore, that there was no nexus between PTSD and your misconduct. 

In regard to your contentions that you were denied your constitutional rights, due process, and had no legal representation, the Board noted that the record contains evidence that you were notified of and waived your right to present your case to an administrative board. In regard to your contention that your XO gave you a direct order to sign papers dismissing your NJP appeal and agreeing to a discharge with an OTH characterization, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention.

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 decisdion upon the submission of new matters. New matters are those 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 of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,


Executive Director