Docket No: 10041-19 
Ref: Signature date 
 
Dear : 
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.     
 
Although you did not file your application in a timely manner, the statute of limitation was waived in accordance with the 25 August 2017 guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Kurta Memo).  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 2021.  The names and votes of the panel members 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, including the Kurta Memo, the 3 September 2014 guidance from the Secretary of Defense regarding discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Hagel Memo), and the 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). 
 
The Board determined that your personal appearance, with or without counsel, would 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. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 29 May 1969.  On 8 October 1969, you commenced a period of unauthorized absence, which ended when you surrendered to military authorities on 26 October 1969.  You received nonjudicial punishment for this period of unauthorized absence on 3 November 1969.  Next, on 6 November 1969, you were notified that you were being processed for administrative separation due to your possession and use of marijuana.  Your commanding officer recommended that you be discharged with a general characterization of service.  On 28 November 1969, you were discharged with a general characterization of service.   
 
The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case including in accordance with the Wilkie Memo.  These included, but were not limited to, your desire to upgrade your discharge and contention that, if your command had given you support and did what was right, the mental health problems that you contend you suffered would not have gotten the best of you.  In connection with reviewing your petition, the Board requested, and obtained, an advisory opinion (AO) from a qualified medical professional, a copy of which was previously provided to you.  According to the AO, the preponderance of available objective evidence fails to establish that you were diagnosed with PTSD, suffered from PTSD at the time of your military service, or your in-service misconduct could be attributed to PTSD or other mental health condition.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded the potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that your repeated misconduct, as evidenced by your nonjudicial punishment for unauthorized absence as well as possession and use of marijuana, outweighed the mitigating factors.  In addition, the Board determined that you were granted considerable clemency in receiving a general, as opposed to an other than honorable, characterization of service based on use and possession of marijuana  Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief 
 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon 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,