DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 7398-18 Ref: Signature Date This letter is in reference to your reconsideration request received on 12 September 2018. You previously petitioned the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) and were advised that your application had been disapproved. Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Sec’y of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). 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. Because your application was submitted with new evidence not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your application. Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session on 13 January 2020. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application and all material submitted in support of your application. In addition, the Board considered the 12 July 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a Navy mental health professional, as well as your supplemental materials received via your Congressman. You presented as new evidence a personal statement, 2019 medication management and psychotherapy treatment summaries, 2017 psychotherapy treatment summaries, a 1997 individual treatment plan from the Department of Criminal Justice, and a statement in support of your post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and traumatic brain injury (TBI) diagnoses from a member of the American Legion. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined that the statement you provided and additional documents, even though not previously considered by the Board, were insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice and thus not material. 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.” As part of the review process, a Navy mental health professional further reviewed your request and provided the Board with an AO regarding your assertion you were suffering from PTSD and TBI conditions during your service. The AO noted, in part, that the medical documentation provided attributes your diagnoses of PTSD and TBI to the medical report you made to your providers, which means that the medical providers did not separately evaluate those disorders. Accordingly, the AO determined that, unfortunately, there is insufficient information to attribute your diagnoses to military service. Your statement and provided medical records demonstrate that you participated in boxing activities before and after serving in the Navy. In-service, your neurological functioning was assessed over approximately one month following a car accident you were involved in, and determined to be intact. The AO noted that, while repeated head injuries can result in multiplicative symptom consequences, you continued to box after military service. Thus, there is insufficient information to attribute current neurological or TBI symptoms solely to your military service. Additionally, your initial diagnosis of bipolar disorder (currently described as schizoaffective disorder) is eleven years after your discharge from the military. The AO determined that there is also insufficient information to attribute this symptom cluster to military service. The AO further determined that there is insufficient information that you meet the symptom criteria for PTSD, as there is no indication of an evaluation for that diagnosis in the documentation you provided. The AO opined that, while it is possible that you may have been experiencing a mental health condition, such as depression, when faced with your physical limitations following your car accident, there is insufficient information to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition incurred during military service. The AO specifically noted that your two non-judicial punishments, as well as your civilian conviction for reckless driving, occurred prior to your accident. The AO further noted that, as you also had a period of unauthorized absence (UA) prior to your accident, it is also possible that your UA following the car accident represented a continuation of your prior misbehavior, rather than a mental health condition. The AO determined that additional, post-service medical records describing the link between your mental health symptoms and your misconduct are required to render an alternate opinion. Accordingly, the Board concurred with the AO’s opinion that, based on the available evidence, it 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 reconsideration petition 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 the absence of new matters for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 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.