Docket No: 6179-19 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 relevant portions of your naval record and your application, 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. 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 for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 22 June 1989. On 31 October 1990, you were found guilty at nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for assault. On 4 January 1991, you received a second NJP for a period of unauthorized absence (UA) from 19-27 December 1990). Message Traffic dated 19 June 1991, indicates that separation proceedings had been initiated against you on the basis of misconduct (commission of a serious offense) and personality disorder. You were discharged from the Navy on 28 June 1991, on the basis of Misconduct-Commission of a Serious Offense, and received an other than honorable discharge and a reentry (RE) code of RE-4. In your application for correction, you have asked the Board to upgrade your other than honorable discharge to an honorable characterization of service. You assert that the pressure and stress of being in war and at sea was taking a toll on you mentally, and that Post Traumatic Stress Disorder led to behavior issues which caused the discharge. You stated that in 1991, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was not considered. Since that time, you state you have been clinically diagnosed with PTSD and have been on medication for treatment. You submitted a letter from the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (undated), which confirms your diagnosis of PTSD and Persistent Depressive Disorder (dysthemia) and states you have been prescribed various medications since 2007. The Board noted that you have raised the issue of having mental health conditions as a mitigating factor to your misconduct. 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. The Board also reviewed your petition in light of the Under Secretary of Defense’s memorandum, “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations” of 25 July 2018. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, including your diagnosis of PTSD and Persistent Depressive Disorder (dysthemia). The Board reviewed your contention that you suffered a mental health condition at the time of your Naval service and considered your post-discharge diagnosis and medical treatment as confirmed by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction. The Board found however, that the information you provided established treatment since 2007, but did not address the issue of whether you suffered from a mental health condition in 1990 and 1991, during the time of your misconduct in the Navy. Absent such information, the Board found there was not a sufficient basis to determine that you had a qualifying mental health condition that mitigated your in-service misconduct. In considering your contention that the pressure of being at war and at sea contributed to your PTSD, the Board also noted that although you served on a ship, that ship was not deployed in support of combat operations during the period of your service. The Board relied on the misconduct documented in your record to include an NJP for assault and an NJP for a multi-day period of UA. The Board concluded that the misconduct documented in your record supported your other than honorable discharge and that your characterization of service does not merit corrective action. 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,