DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 271-19 Ref: Signature Date Dear : This is in reference to your application of 20 November 2018 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 that the evidence submitted 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 28 April 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a Navy mental health professional dated 9 September 2019, which was previously provided to you. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 29 May 1969. On 8 July 1970, you were interrogated by a special agent of the Naval Investigative Service (NIS). You admitted that you were involved with the use and possession of narcotics and illegal drugs. On 31 July 1970, you were notified of an administrative action to separate you from the naval service for your use of narcotic substances. After being afforded your procedural rights, you elected to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 1 September 1970, the ADB found that you were involved in the wrongful use of drugs. The ADB also recommended that you be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. On 19 September 1970, your commanding officer forwarded your case to the separation authority, also recommending that you received a general characterization of service. On 12 October 1970, the separation authority concurred and directed that you be separated from the Navy with a general. On 23 October 1970, you were so discharged. 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 MilitaryBoards 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 ReviewBoards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations.” A 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 PTSD during your service. The AO noted that in July 1970, during a Naval Investigative Service (NIS) interview, you reported marijuana and ‘speed’ use due to frustration about people in the Navy and you started to use ‘pot’ since it was available. The AO noted that, in July 1990, you were evaluated by a psychiatrist who diagnosed you with an immature personality and chronic drug abuse. You were not found physically drug dependent. The AO stated that in your current request for review, you submitted a statement that you incurred a serious physical assault when returning to base while off-duty, which you did not report, but resulted in serious physical injury and PTSD. The AO considered your Department of Veterans Affairs (DA) disability rating decision letter determining 100% disability for PTSD. The AO noted that there is no information in your service record that you incurred a traumatic physical assault, which should have resulted in medical attention. The AO also noted that your in-service statement regarding your drug use attributed it to being disaffected by the treatment you received from your Shipmates, rather than self-medication from symptoms of PTSD. The AO opined that based on the available evidence, there is insufficient evidence to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition incurred during military service. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your record of service, and desire to upgrade your discharge. The Board considered that you are a 100% disabled veteran. The Board also considered your assertions that you want an upgrade because in your seventh week of “A” School, you were attacked by five college students while walking back to your car, and that you never reported the incident, but you were badly beaten. The Board concluded these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant changing your characterization of service given your misconduct that result in your involvement with illegal drugs. The Board reviewed the AO and concurred with the AO’s opinion that there is insufficient evidence to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition incurred during military 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. Sincerely,