DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 2049-19 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. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will 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. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 July 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 21 February 2020 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 1 August 1989. During the period from 24 October 1990 to 30 April 1991, you received three nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for being absent from your unit, malingering, failing to obey an order, making a false official statement, unauthorized absence (UA), and missing ship’s movement. On 23 August 1991, you were counseled concerning your difficulty obeying superiors appointed over you and being to work on time. On 25 March 1992, you received NJP for three days of UA. On 11 May 1992, administrative discharge action was initiated to separate you from the Navy for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and a pattern of misconduct. After you were afforded your procedural rights, you consulted with counsel and elected not to have your case heard before an administrative discharge board. Your case was forwarded to the separation authority, and on 8 June 1992, it was directed that you be separated from the Navy with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. On 24 June 1992, you were separated from the Navy with an OTH discharge. 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 a mental health condition. The AO noted that on your Separation Physical Examination, you stated you were in good health and endorsed “depression or excessive worry” but no other mental health symptoms or conditions. The remainder of your in-service clinical and personnel records failed to reveal any evidence of in-service mental health symptoms or conditions, and you have submitted no information that you had a clinical diagnosis of any mental health conditions as rendered by a mental health practitioner. Based on the available evidence, there is insufficient evidence of a mental health condition attributable to your military service that may have mitigated your misconduct. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service, your desire to upgrade your discharge, and the character reference letters and certificates you submitted with your petition. The Board also considered your assertions that you believe your punishment was too severe given the situation, and that personal problems impaired your ability to serve. You explain that, after you joined the Navy, your father became hooked on drugs and left the family, you had marital and family problems, faced racial discrimination, and there were matters of conscience that impaired your ability to be a good servicemember. The Board concluded these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant an upgrade in the characterization of your discharge given your misconduct, which resulted in four NJPs and the fact that you were counseled and warned of the consequences of further misconduct. Further, the Board concurred with the AO that there is insufficient evidence of a mental health condition attributable to your military service that may have mitigated your misconduct. 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.