Docket No: 7681-19 Ref: Signature Date Dear This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code. 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 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 21 December 2000. The names and votes of the panel members 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 the 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, to include the Kurta Memo, the 3 September 2014 guidance from the Secretary of Defense regarding discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Hagel Memo), and the 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 13 July 2001. On 3 June 2002, you pled guilty before a civilian court for driving under the influence (DUI). In November 2002, you completed an Alcohol IMPACT Program. In January 2003, two months after completing IMPACT, you were arrested by the Police Department for DUI. On 30 January 2003, you were again convicted in civilian court for DUI. On 6 October 2003, you were found guilty at nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to your appointed place of duty and insubordinate conduct toward a warrant, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer. On 14 October 2003, you were found guilty at NJP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty and failure to obey a lawful order. On 4 November 2003, you were notified of administrative separation proceedings against you on the basis of a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure. You subsequently waived your right to appear before an administrative separation board. On 25 November 2003, Commanding Officer, , forwarded your package to the Separation Authority recommending that you receive an other than honorable (OTH) discharge. The recommendation was approved, and on 10 January 2004, you were discharged from the Navy, with an OTH characterization and a reentry (RE) code of RE-4. In your application to the Board, you request an upgrade from an OTH discharge to a general (under honorable conditions). You state that you feel like you were a scapegoat at the time of your discharge and that you have a severe condition due to your time in Iraq. You state that you have just finally been convinced to try and get help from Veterans Affairs (VA). The Board noted that your application for correction raises a potential issue of a mental health condition due to your time in Iraq. In a communication dated 16 September 2019, you were asked to provide additional medical or clinical evidence to support your claim. When you did not provide additional evidence, your case was re-opened and processed for consideration by the Board. As part of the review process, a Licensed Clinical Psychologist reviewed your request and issued an Advisory Opinion (AO) dated 12 November 2020. The AO noted that you did not provide any evidence of symptoms, traumatic event or information about a clinical diagnosis. The AO concluded that the preponderance of available evidence fails to establish that you were diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), suffered from PTSD at the time of your military service, or that your in-service misconduct could be attributed to PTSD or other mental health condition. The AO was provided to you, and you were given 30 days in which to submit a response. When you did not provide a response within the 30-day timeframe, your case was submitted to the Board for consideration. The Board also carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case including in accordance with the Wilkie Memo, then Hagel Memo, and the Kurta Memo. These included, but were not limited to your contention that you were a scapegoat while in the Navy and that you suffered from a mental health condition due to your time in Iraq. The Board noted that your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) reflects your entitlement to the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal as well as the Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, as evidence of your time in Iraq. Even in consideration of the statements in your application and the information in your available service record, the Board substantively concurred with the AO and determined that there is insufficient evidence to find that you suffered from a mental health condition while in the Navy that mitigated your in-service misconduct. The Board concluded that the two civilian convictions and the two NJPs supported the issuance of the OTH discharge. The Board also reviewed the available records and noted that on 4 November 2003, you were notified of and waived your right to appear before an administrative separation board. The Board found that the administrative separation process appears to have been executed appropriately, and that you were properly discharged with an OTH characterization of service. The Board concluded that your current discharge was issued without error of injustice, and does not merit corrective action. 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,