Docket No: 9791-19 
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 you did not file your application in a timely manner, the statute of limitation was waived in accordance with the 25 August 2017 guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Kurta Memo).  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 December 2020.  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 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, 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).  Additionally, the Board also considered the advisory opinion (AO) furnished by a qualified mental health provider. 
 
The Board determined that your personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 30 August 2001.  On 2 July 2002, after two alcohol-related liberty incidents, you were evaluated by the    medical officer, and when asked about past history, you noted a significant psychiatric past starting at the age of 13-14 which required hospitalization and medication and resulted in diagnoses of bipolar, manic depression, schizophrenia, and attention deficit disorder.  On 8 July 2002, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey an order/regulation.  On 4 September 2002, you received a second NJP for a two-day unauthorized absence.  On 26 September 2002, you received a third NJP for wrongful use of a controlled substance.  Your record is incomplete in that it does not contain the documents pertaining to your administrative discharge but, based on your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), it appears that after being afforded all of your rights, the separation authority directed discharge with an other than honorable (OTH) character of service by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  You were discharged on 25 October 2002. 
 
As part of the Board’s review, a qualified mental health professional reviewed your request and provided the Board with an AO on 17 December 2020.  The AO stated that your in-service records contain direct evidence of increasing psychological/behavioral changes consistent with a service member developing a hypo-manic/manic episode as a precursor to in-service bipolar diagnosis.  Additionally, the AO confirmed you failed to disclose a significant pre-service psychiatric history that included treatment for similar conditions during your adolescence that made it likely you experienced a recurrence of pre-service conditions under the stress of military service and shipboard deployment.  Based on the available evidence, the AO concluded there is sufficient objective evidence that you experienced a recurrence of a pre-existing mental health condition, bipolar disorder, as a result of your military service and that your misconduct may be mitigated by your mental health condition.   
 
The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contention that your reason for discharge is “thought to be medical.”  You further contend you were discharged because you “can’t be on a ship on lithium” which is what you had been prescribed due to your bipolar disorder.  The Board noted your failure to disclose your pre-service mental health condition.  Specifically, the Board considered your significant psychiatric past, as reported by you during a 2 July 2002 medical appointment, which began as early as 13 and included auditory and visual hallucinations, required hospitalization and medication, and resulted in diagnoses of “bipolar, manic-depressive, schizophrenic, ADD.”  Applying liberal consideration and noting your failure to disclose a psychiatric condition which would have disqualified you from enlistment, the Board discerned no procedural defect, impropriety, or inequity in your discharge and determined your drug-related misconduct warranted an OTH character of service.  
 
The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case in accordance with the Wilkie Memo.  These included, but were not limited to, your desire to upgrade your discharge and contentions discussed above.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined your misconduct outweighed these mitigating factors.  Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief.   
 
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,