DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 10019-18 Ref: Signature Date This is in reference to your application of 19 September 2018 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2020. 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a Navy mental health professional dated 16 September 2019, which was previously provided to you. On 29 August 1978, you reenlisted in the Navy after serving over a year and 10 months. During the period from 23 May 1979 to 1 February 1983, you received four non-judicial punishments (NJPs) for three periods of unauthorized absence, failure to obey orders, disrespect, and two instances of being absent from your appointed place of duty. On 14 April 1983, a substance abuse report stated you had no potential for further Navy service. On 2 June 1983, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of wrongful use of cocaine. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor and a reduction in paygrade. On 3 October 1983, you were notified of an administrative action to separate you from the naval service for misconduct due to drug abuse and a pattern of misconduct. After being afforded your procedural rights, you elected to waive your right to present your case to an administrative discharge board and advocate for a general characterization of service. Your case was forwarded to the separation authority, on 8 November 1983. The separation authority directed that you receive an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to your frequent involvement with military authorities. On 7 September 1983, you were so discharged from the Navy. You request an upgrade of your characterization of service on the basis that you suffered from a mental health condition during your military service. Your request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense's 3 September 2014 memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder,” the 25 August 2017 memorandum, “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards 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,” and the 25 July 2018 memorandum, “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations.” A Navy mental health professional further reviewed your request for correction to your record and provided the Board with an AO regarding your assertion you were suffering from a mental health condition during your service. The AO noted that in July 1983, you were evaluated by a medical officer who determined that you were not dependent on drugs or alcohol. You submitted a personal statement that you was suffering from alcohol use disorder during your military service but have since received treatment and became a religious minister. The AO noted that additional records, such as post-service medical records describing your mental health diagnoses and the history of your mental health symptoms, are required to render an alternate opinion. The AO opined that there is insufficient evidence to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition suffered during military service. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your record of service, desire to upgrade your discharge, letters of support from your family and friends attesting to your character and contributions in the community, and certificates of a license to minister and community recognitions. The Board also considered your assertions that you are a new man, have several letters of recommendations to show the change in your life, and now know your difficulties were rooted in alcohol abuse. Additionally, you contend that you have been clean and sober for 30 years, were a practicing alcoholic, alcoholism had a deep and debilitating impact on your mental health, and it regretfully affected your ability to engage appropriately as a member of the Navy. No other records were available for review. You submitted no documentation of a mental health diagnosis. In-service, you were determined not to be dependent on drugs or alcohol. Additional records, such as post-service medical records describing your mental health diagnoses, and the history of your mental health symptoms are required to render an alternate opinion. Based on the available evidence, the Board concluded that there is insufficient evidence to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition suffered during military service. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. 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,