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

Docket No: 4044-18/ 13097-10 
AUG 19 2019


This letter is in reference to your reconsideration request of Docket No: 13097-10. You previously petitioned the Board for Correction ofNaval Records (Board), and were advised that your application had been denied. Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Secretary ofthe Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. Consequently, your reconsideration request has been denied. 

Because your application was submitted with new evidence not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest ofjustice to review your application. Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-member panel ofthe Board, sitting in executive session on 8 July 2018. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application and all material submitted in support of your application. In addition, the Board considered the enclosed and previously provided 20 November 2018 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a Navy mental health professional. The Board also consider the enclosed 7 December 2018 updated AO, in response to your 7 December 2018 rebuttal materials. 

You presented as new evidence, a statement that you developed post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and bipolar mood disorder following your experienced during Operation Desert Shield. The Board determined that the statement you provided, even though not previously considered by the Board, was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

You requested an upgrade to your characterization ofservice on the basis that you were suffering from PTSD at the time ofyour military service. Your request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary ofDefense's 3 September 2014 memorandum, "Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction ofMilitary/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder" of, the 25 August 2017 memorandum "Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards 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," and the 25 July 2018 memorandum, "Guidance to Military Discharge Review boards and Boards for Correction ofMilitary/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations." 

As part ofthe review process, a Navy mental health professional also reviewed your request and provided the Board with two AOs regarding your assertion ofsuffering from PTSD. The initial AO states, in part, that you did not provide any post-service mental health records or diagnosis. While it is entirely possible that you developed PTSD, in the absence oftreatment records of disability evaluation paperwork, it is not possible to attribute your misconduct to PTSD. Unauthorized absence and substance use could be attributed to many factors, including PTSD, avoidance symptoms, or dissatisfaction with military culture. In the absence ofpost-service treatment records, there is insufficient evidence to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition. 

After you received the AO, you submitted additional evidence consisting ofexcerpted progress notes from your civilian mental health provider. The notes indicate that you are receiving treatment for depression, but not bipolar disorder. The updated AO states, in part, that a few symptoms of PTSD stemming from your first gulfwar experience of fishing a dismembered body from the water are noted, including intermittent intrusive memories and hypervigilance in public. Diagnoses ofrecurrent major depressive disorder and mild PTSD are listed. Your limited post-service records indicate that you have been diagnosed with PTSD, and that your civilian provider has attributed that disorder to your military service. Unfortunately, there is not enough information regarding your symptoms of PTSD for the AO or the Board to attribute them to your in-service misconduct. Based on the new evidence, the updated AO concurred with the original AO's determination that there is insufficient evidence to attribute your in-service misconduct to PTSD. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your desire to upgrade your character ofservice, and your assertions that your record is unjust because you were suffering from a mental disorder that happened as a result of Operation Desert Shield. The Board also considered that you were diagnosed with PTSD and bipolar disorder, and believe that if those two disorders would have been diagnosed in time, your military career may have turned out differently. The Board concurred with the AO's statements that there is insufficient evidence to attribute your in-service misconduct to a mental health condition. Even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board found that the seriousness ofyour misconduct merited your receipt ofan other than honorable characterization ofservice. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable action cannot be taken again. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission ofnew 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 the absence of new matters for reconsideration, the decision ofthe Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court ofappropriate jurisdiction. 

It is important to keep in mind that a preswnption 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. 

Executive Director