Docket No:  3620-19 
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 BCNR, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 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 and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.  In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a qualified mental health professional dated 10 June 2020, which was previously provided to you. 
  
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 2 June 1982.  On 30 March and 30 November 1984, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of two periods of unauthorized absence totaling 36 days.  On 12 December 1984, you were counseled regarding your conduct not conforming to Navy regulations and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.  On 15 March 1985, you were convicted by civil authorities of drinking in public.  On 2 June and 7 July 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment for breach of the peace and wrongful use of marijuana.  On 24 September 1985, you were convicted by SCM of wrongful use of cocaine.  On 5 October 1985, a Drug/Alcohol Abuse Report identified you as a drug abuser after two confirmed positive urinalysis for marijuana.  On 16 October 1985, you were notified of administrative discharge action due to a pattern of misconduct and drug abuse.  After being afforded your procedural rights, your case was forwarded to the separation authority with the recommendation that you receive an other than honorable (OTH) discharge.  On 31 October 1985, the separation authority directed that you receive an OTH discharge due to a pattern of misconduct.  On 13 November 1985, you were discharged from the Navy with an OTH characterization of service. 
 
You have requested an upgrade of your characterization of service on the basis that you suffered from Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) during your military service.  Your request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense’s Memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder” of 3 September 2014 and the "Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Board 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" memorandum of 25 August 2017. 
 
A qualified mental health professional further 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.  As reflected in the AO, the mental health professional noted that there was no clinical history or timeline describing the association between your mental health condition and your in-service misconduct, and your in-service records did not provide evidence of a mental health condition.  The mental health professional also noted that while you submitted post-discharge evidence of Major Depressive Disorder, Somatic Symptom Disorder, and Borderline Personality Disorder documented 26 years after your military discharge, there was no clinical history or timeline describing the association between these mental health diagnoses and your in-service misconduct, or of their clinical manifestation during your military service.  The mental health professional opined that additional information, such as personnel or medical records documenting changes in your mental state or associated behaviors and linked to your military misconduct is required to render an alternate opinion. Should you choose to submit additional clinical information, it will be reviewed in the context of your claims.  However, at this time, based on the available evidence, it was opined that there is insufficient evidence that you incurred PTSD, or other mental health conditions, as a result of your military service, or that your in-service misconduct could be attributed to a mental health condition. 
  
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, including but not limited to the following:  (a) that an injustice is to be corrected due to a senior officer spitting in your face and calling you a racist slur; (b) you were put in jail for defending yourself, and were never offered any help for your self-medicating at the time while incarcerated; and (c) that after serving your country, you were treated unjustly because you were a black man.  The Board concluded these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct, which resulted in two NJPs, three SCM convictions and conviction by civil authorities.  Further, the Board concurred with the AO’s statement that, there is insufficient evidence that you incurred PTSD, or other mental health conditions, as a result of your military service, or that your in-service misconduct could be attributed to a mental health condition. 
  
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 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,