DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 10640-18 Ref: Signature Date This is in reference to your application of 17 October 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. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will 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 19 March 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 3 September 2019, which was previously provided to you. You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 21 October 85. On 17 October 1986, you were counseled regarding your irresponsibility in failing to phone in while on authorized absence. On 3 November 1986, you began a period of UA that lasted 139 days, ending on 22 March 1987. On 28 May 1987, you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge for the good of the service in order to avoid trial by court-martial for 139 days of unauthorized absence. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you conferred with a military lawyer, were advised of your rights, and were warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and on 13 July 1987, you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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 mental health professional reviewed your request for correction to your record and provided the Board with an AO regarding your assertion that you was suffering from mental health condition during your service. The AO noted you submitted a brief statement that you incurred a mental health condition due to your combat occupation and self-medicated with substances, which resulted in discharge. The AO noted that you provided no medical documentation of a mental health diagnosis. The AO concluded that there is insufficient evidence to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition. The AO opined that there is insufficient evidence to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition incurred during military service. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your record of service, and desire to upgrade your discharge. You contend that the UA was your first offense and had no previous disciplinary issues. The Board also considered your assertions that there was no remedies nor alternative actions offered, that you were not offered a mental assessment to determine why you left in the first place, and your conduct up until that point was ignored. Additionally, you contend that alcoholism and drug use was rampant, as well as other unacceptable behaviors. The Board concluded these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant changing your characterization of service given your lengthy period of UA, the referral of charges to a court-martial, and your request for discharge. The Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge was approved. Further, the Board concurred with the AO’s statement that there is insufficient evidence to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition incurred 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, 4/8/2020