DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 7518-18 Ref: Signature Date This is in reference to your application of 27 August 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 9 December 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, 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 of 19 July 2019, which was previously provided to you. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 24 September 1980. On 26 March and 27 November 1981, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for disobeying a lawful order and intent to defraud. On 19 January 1982, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. On 1 February 1982, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of six days of unauthorized absence (UA), and failure to obey a lawful general regulation. During the period from 26 March 1982 to 17 June 1983, you received three additional NJPs for two instances of disobeying a lawful order, two periods UA, failure to go to appointed place of duty, missing ship’s movement, and using disrespectful language toward a petty officer. On 18 June 1983, you were notified of an administrative action to separate you from the naval service for a pattern of misconduct. After being afforded your procedural rights, your case was forwarded to the separation authority with the recommendation that you receive an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to a pattern of misconduct. On 8 August 1983, the separation authority directed that you be discharged with OTH characterization of service. On 16 August 1983, you were so discharged. 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 PTSD during your service. The AO noted that in your discharge physical, you did not report any psychiatric abnormalities. In your current request for review, you submitted a personal statement that you were suffering from unrecognized mental health conditions during your military service. Additionally, you submitted certificates of completion of a substance abuse program in June 2018 and a recovery course in May 2019. Unfortunately, you submitted no medical records confirming a mental health diagnosis. Your history and statement indicate that your marijuana use pre-dates your military service and, as such, is not attributed to military service. The AO opined that additional post-service medical records describing your mental health diagnoses and the specific link between the symptoms and your misconduct are required to render an alternate opinion. The AO concluded that, based on the preponderance of the evidence, there is insufficient information 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. The Board also considered your contention that while you were in the service, you were affected by trauma, alcoholism, drug addiction, race related issues, mental problems, personal problems, and depression that were not treated or recognized during your service. Additionally, that you have tried to serve and have struggled with issues in and out of the service. The Board concluded these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant change in the characterization of your discharge given your misconduct, which resulted in five NJPs, a warning about the consequences of further misconduct after your second NJP, and a SCM conviction. Further, the Board concurred with the AO’s statement that there is insufficient information 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, 1/6/2020