Docket No:  3114-19 
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 10 August 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 advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a qualified mental health professional dated 1 May 2020, which was previously provided to you. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 12 January 1979.  On 27 October 1980 and 28 January 1981, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful appropriation, and 10 periods of unauthorized absence (UA).  Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct would result in you being considered for separation that could result in a misconduct discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions.  During the period from 9 March 1981 to 19 June 1981, you received three additional NJPs for numerous periods of UA, breach of peace, and several instances of failing to obey a lawful order.  On 22 June 1981, you were notified of administrative processing for misconduct due to frequent involvement with military authorities.  On 5 August 1981, after consulting with counsel, you waived your procedural rights.  On 24 August 1981, your case was forwarded to the separation authority with a recommendation that you receive an OTH discharge.  On 1 September 1981, the separation authority directed your discharge due to your frequent involvement with military authorities with an OTH characterization of service.  On 4 November 1981, you were so discharged.    
 
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 qualified mental health professional further reviewed your request for correction to your record and provided the Board with an AO.  The mental health professional reviewed your contentions in conjunction with your available medical records in order to evaluate your assertion you were suffering from a mental health condition.  However, the AO concluded that there is insufficient evidence to support the existence of an in-service mental health condition to which your misconduct could be attributed. 
  
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 assertions that you were told incorrectly about the type of discharge you would receive, and you feel like you were flat out lied to, and it was unnecessary.  However, the Board ultimately concluded that these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct, which resulted in several NJPs, and the fact that you were warned of the consequences of further misconduct.  The Board noted that the record shows you consulted with counsel after being notified of your administrative processing, and subsequently waived your rights.  Further, the Board concurred with the AO’s statement that, there is insufficient evidence to support your contention you incurred a mental health condition as a result of your military service or that you suffered from a mental health condition that would mitigate your in-service 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. 
 
Sincerely,