DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 2194-19 Ref: Signature date Dear : This letter 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 with respect to your request to upgrade your characterization of service was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 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. The Board also requested, and considered, an advisory opinion (AO) provided by a medical doctor. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a 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 10 June 1986. On 10 June 1988, you received nonjudicial punishment for disrespect to a petty officer. On 22 August 1988, you received nonjudicial punishment again for disrespect to a petty officer and for failing to obey a lawful order. In September 1989, you received nonjudicial punishment two more times, for two instances of disrespect (one to a commissioned officer) and for assault. On 27 September 1989, you were notified of the initiation of administratve separation processing due to a pattern of misconduct. You waived your right to an administrative board. In his letter recommending your discharge, your commanding officer noted that you “were counseled by the Executive Officer on numbers occasions as well as by other members of his chain of command” and that you had become “an administrative burden to the command despite all efforts to assist him.” You were discharged on 5 December 1989 with an other than honorable characterization of service. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, including that you contend at the time of your discharge you were under mental stress and that you are currently being treated for mental illness. The Board requested an AO on your case to evaluate your claim. You did not submit any additional material, and the AO was based on the review of all available records. You have previously been provided a copy of the AO. According to the AO, the Petitioner has submitted no information or evidence in support of his petition for upgrade of his discharge due to the presence of a mental health condition either in-service or post-discharge. Additional information, such as personal statements or medical records documenting any symptoms or behaviors suggestive of a mental health condition and linked to his military misconduct is required to render an alternate opinion. Should the Petitioner choose to submit additional clinical information, it will be reviewed in the context of his claims. The AO concluded by stating that, “at this time, based on the available evidence, it is my considered opinion that there is insufficient evidence that the Petitioner incurred a mental health condition during his military service, or that the Petitioner’s misconduct could be attributed to a mental health condition.” After careful consideration of your contentions, including the AO described above, the Board did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants upgrading your characterization of 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.