DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 1214-19 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 2 June 2020. 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, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In addition, the Board considered the 25 November 2019 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a Navy mental health professional, which was previously provided to you. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 4 November 1977. On 19 May 1978, you reported to Fighter Squadron 24, located at Naval Air Station . During the period from 31 July 1978 to 24 October 1978, you were in an 85-day unauthorized absence (UA) status from your squadron on board the USS . During the period from 25 October 1978 to 7 March 1979, you were in a 133-day UA status from your squadron after failing to comply with issued Technical Arrest Orders (TAO). At that time, you were placed on legal hold. On 7 May 1979, you surrendered onboard Naval Station, , after being UA since 8 March 1979, a total of 61 days. Charges were referred to trial by special court-martial. During the period from 8 May 1979 to 13 March 1980, you were UA from your squadron onboard the USS for 309 days. After failing to comply with TAO, you were apprehended by civil authorities and returned to military authority at PSD, . On 27 March 1980, you began another period of UA that lasted 21 days, ending when you surrendered onboard Naval Station, , on 17 April 1980. You were placed on restriction pending legal action. Your original service record was incomplete and did not contain any documentation pertaining to your separation from the Navy. Based on your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD 214), it appears you requested an other than honorable characterization of service, for the good of the service for five periods of UA, totaling approximately 609 days. You were discharged on 4 June 1980. Absent any conflicting evidence, the Board relied upon the presumption of regularity and presumed that the officials acted in accordance with governing law/policy and in good faith. 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 SexualHarassment,” 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 a mental health condition. The AO noted that your description of your traumatic event in-service could reasonably have led to the beginnings of a mental health condition during your military service to which your misconduct could be attributed. The AO concluded that there is sufficient evidence to partially support your request to upgrade the characterization of your service. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and desire to upgrade your discharge. The Board also considered your assertion that you were fraudulently enlisted because your recruiter lied and encouraged you to lie to get into the Navy. He took advantage of you, as you did not have a high school diploma. He drove you to get your General Education Development certificate. Additionally, you assert that you almost lost your life and were given an OTH discharge after you went through a life-altering situation. You claim when you were learning hand signals for the F-14, two planes were in the training area, and you were not notified that one of the planes was being fired up while you were leaning down under the intake, which caused your body to begin to be sucked into the intake. You were pulled to safety with injury, and your life passed before you. You also assert, when you most needed the military, they were not there for you. The Board concluded these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant an upgrade in the characterization of your discharge given your repeated misconduct, which resulted in five periods of UA, totaling over 18 months. 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,