Docket No: 10386-19 Ref: Signature Date Dear : This is in reference to your application 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 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 8 March 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 the 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, to include the 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a qualified mental health professional dated 8 January 2021, which was previously provided to you. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 18 February 1986. On 20 February 1986, you were, briefed on the Navy policy regarding drug and alcohol abuse. On 19 July 1986, you were involved in a motor vehicle accident while on leave in a. You were diagnosed with a Posterior Hip Dislocation (right hip), with Central Acetabular Fracture, Right Knee Laceration with Peripheral Tear of Lateral Meniscus, Right Forearm Laceration, and Right Ankle Laceration. On 24 July 1986, you were admitted into an Orthopedic Clinic, and on 28 August 1986, a medical board opined that you were not fit for full duty, but fit for limited duty. It was recommended that you be returned to a period of six months limited duty ashore. On 30 April 1987, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of 10 specifications of failing to go to your appointed place of duty, and wrongful use of marijuana. On 14 May 1987, you were re-evaluated, and found not fit for full duty, but fit for limited duty. You were recommended to return to an additional period of six months of limited duty, ashore. At that time, it was anticipated that within six months you would be fit for full duty, and you elected not to make a statement. As a result, On 15 May 1987, you were placed on six months of limited duty. On 10 June 1987, you were counseled regarding failing to obey orders and warned that further deficiencies in your performance and or conduct could result in administrative discharge action. On 25 June 1987, the Commander, concurred with the recommendation of the Medical Board held, and convening authority stating that if you could not return to full duty following your period of limited duty, referral to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) should be considered. On 14 July 1987, the separation authority concurred with Naval Medical Command in recommending six months of additional limited duty. On 16 November and 3 December 1987, you were counseled concerning you being late for quarters and having an unsatisfactory uniform at quarters. You were warned on both occasions that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. On 19 January 1988, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three specifications of unauthorized absence totaling six days, and failure to go to your appointed place of duty. On 6 April 1988, you were notified of administrative discharge action for drug abuse, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense. After being afforded your procedural rights, you waived all of your rights except the right to obtain copies of documents forwarded to support the basis for your separation. On 24 April 1988, a Counseling and Assistant Center (CAAC) evaluation indicated you tested positive for marijuana. On 7 June 1988, your case was forwarded to the separation authority with the recommendation that you receive and other than honorable (OTH) discharge. On 1 July 1988, you were evaluated by CAAC as a result of a positive urinalysis for marijuana. On 22 July 1988, you stated to CAAC that you felt you did not have a problem with drugs or alcohol, denied any pre-service drug use, and admitted to a one-time use of marijuana while in the Navy. On 26 August 1988, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use of cocaine. On 13 September 1988, you were referred to medical personnel for claustrophobia and expression of suicidal ideations. On 28 September 1988, your case was forwarded, and on 24 October 1988, the separation authority directed that you receive an OTH discharge due to a pattern of misconduct. On 1 November 1988, you were discharged from the Navy with an OTH characterization of service. Your request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense’s Memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder” of 3 September 2014 and the "Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Board 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" memorandum of 25 August 2017. A qualified mental health professional reviewed your request for correction to your record and provided the Board with an AO regarding your assertion that you were suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) during your service. The AO noted that based on the available evidence, 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 that your in-service misconduct could be attributed to PTSD or other mental health condition. The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case in accordance with the Wilkie Memo. These included, but were not limited to your contentions that: (a) you used marijuana to relieve the physical pain, mental stress, and nightmares caused by injuries you received in a July 1986 motor vehicle accident; (b) you have not used any type of drugs since then; and (c) all your medical and mental treatment is from the Department of Veterans Affairs, and you need rehabilitation for your drug problems and PTSD. Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief. Specifically, the Board determined that your misconduct, as evidenced by your two SPCM convictions, NJP, drug involvement, and the fact that you were briefed on the Navy’s policy regarding drug and alcohol abuse and warned of the consequences of further misconduct, outweighed these mitigating factors. Additionally, the Board concurred with the AO that 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. 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,