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. 
 
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 case on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 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.   
 
A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in October 2010.  During a period of unauthorized absence, you were seen by a civilian medical provider who opined you may suffer from post-concussion syndrome from a reported head contusion incident in January 2011.  Non-judicial punishment was imposed on 30 June 2011 for your unauthorized absence (UA) and you were later diagnosed with an adjustment disorder.  Later, after you were notified of administrative separation processing for condition not a disability, you refused treatment for potential Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) symptoms.  As a result, you were discharged on 14 October 2011 for condition not a disability with a General characterization of service.  Post-discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated you for TBI with anxiety disorder and migraine headaches in addition to granting you individual unemployability status. 
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve an upgrade to your characterization of service based on your discharge based on your adjustment disorder.  You argue that your assigned characterization of service was unjust due to the circumstances of your discharge.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  First, the Board 
applied liberal consideration in determining whether an upgrade to your characterization of service was appropriate.  Second, after carefully considering the facts of your case in conjunction with the mitigation evidence of your diagnosed TBI with anxiety and adjustment disorder, the Board determined your characterization of service remains appropriate.  MCO 1900.16 requires a conduct trait average of at least 4.0 to qualify for an Honorable characterization of service.  In your case, your conduct trait average for your active duty period was 3.6.  Therefore, the Board found the assignment of a General characterization of service to you was supported by your conduct trait average and the applicable regulation.  However, the Board also liberally considered whether your unauthorized absence was mitigated by your TBI and adjustment disorder diagnoses.  In the end, they concluded these mental health conditions did not sufficiently mitigate your misconduct.  While the Board felt a potential nexus existed between your adjustment disorder and your misconduct, they concluded it did not excuse your decision to go UA for an extended period of time.  In their opinion, 27 days of UA was too serious of an offense to be mitigated by an adjustment disorder condition; a condition that is not uncommon for many new Marines.  The fact you sought out medical care from a civilian provider while in an UA status led the Board to conclude you were aware that medical assistance was an available course of action instead of committing misconduct.  Additionally, the Board found no nexus between your TBI and your misconduct.  In their opinion, the potential post-concussive syndrome diagnosis related to your TBI could not be reasonably tied to your misconduct since your concussive event allegedly occurred 3-4 months prior to your decision to go UA.  Based on these factors, the Board concluded the preponderance of the evidence does not support an upgrade to your characterization of service.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record.   
 
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.