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 12 February 2021.  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, an Advisory Opinion (AO) from a qualified mental health provider, 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 on 12 September 1996.  Your pre-enlistment medical history and physical examination noted no psychiatric or neurologic conditions or symptoms.  On 2 March 1998 you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for the wrongful use of methamphetamines.  You received the maximum prescribed punishment for your drug offense.   
 
On 5 March 1998 you were notified that you were being processed for an administrative discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  You expressly waived your rights to consult with counsel, submit a written statement, and to present your case to an administrative separation board.  Your separation physical and medical history on 16 March 1998 both noted no psychiatric or neurologic conditions or symptoms.  Ultimately, on 27 March 1998 you were separated from the Navy with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge.   
 
As part of the review process, the BCNR Physician Advisor who is also a medical doctor (MD) and a Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association, reviewed your mental health contentions and the available records and issued an AO dated 5 January 2021.  The MD initially observed that you did not provide evidence of either in-service documentation or post-discharge evidence of a mental health condition linked to your in-service misconduct.  The MD noted that your in-service records failed to reveal any evidence of in-service mental health symptoms or conditions other than substance abuse.  The MD concluded by opining that there was insufficient evidence of a service-connected mental health condition that may have mitigated your misconduct.   
 
The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case in accordance with the Kurta, Hagel, and Wilkie Memos.  These included, but were not limited to your contentions that:  (a) you feel your discharge should show honorable or medical; (b) you feel that you were punished rather than disciplined; and (c) you are in need of mental health treatment.  However, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief.    
In accordance with the Kurta, Hagel, and Wilkie Memos, the Board gave liberal and special consideration to your record of service, and your contentions about any traumatic or stressful events you experienced and their possible adverse impact on your service.  However, even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board concluded that there was no convincing evidence that you suffered from any type of diagnosed mental health condition while on active duty, or that any such mental health condition was related to or mitigated the misconduct that formed the basis of your discharge.  As a result, the Board concluded that your misconduct was not due to mental health-related conditions or symptoms.  Moreover, the Board observed that you did not submit any clinical documentation or treatment records to support your mental health claims despite a request from BCNR on 31 October 2019 to specifically provide additional documentary material.  The Board also determined that the evidence of record did not demonstrate that you were not mentally responsible for your conduct or that you should otherwise not be held accountable for your actions.     
 
The Board also noted that there is no provision of federal law or in Navy/Marine Corps regulations that allows for a discharge to be automatically upgraded after a specified number of months or years.  The Board determined that, although one’s service is generally characterized at the time of discharge based on performance and conduct throughout the entire enlistment, the conduct or performance of duty reflected by only one incident of misconduct may provide the underlying basis for discharge characterization.  The Board also determined that characterization under OTH conditions is generally warranted for misconduct and is appropriate when the basis for separation is the commission of an act or acts constituting a significant departure from the conduct expected of a Sailor.  Lastly, absent a material error or injustice, the Board generally will not summarily upgrade a discharge solely for the purpose of facilitating VA benefits, or enhancing educational or employment opportunities.  The Board carefully considered any matters submitted regarding your post-service conduct and accomplishments.  However, even in light of the Wilkie Memo and reviewing the record holistically, the Board still concluded that given the totality of the circumstances your request does not merit relief.  Accordingly, the Board determined that there was no impropriety or inequity in your discharge, and even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board concluded that your serious misconduct clearly merited your receipt of an OTH. 
 
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,