DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 7721-18 Ref: Signature Date Dear This letter 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 that 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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 2019. 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will 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 12 July 1990. According to the information in your record, on 15 April 1992, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for three unauthorized absences (UA) and failures to obey a lawful order. You requested a good of the service (GOS) discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial for a reason not listed in your record. Although the Board lacked your entire service record, the Board relied on a presumption of regularity that prior to submitting this request, you conferred with a military lawyer, at which time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. Your request was granted and your commanding officer (CO) was directed to discharge you with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service for the good of the service. As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction, as well as the potential penalties of such a punitive discharge. On 21 September 1993, pursuant to your request, you were so discharged. As stated previously, the Board relies on a presumption of regularity to support the official actions of public officers and, in the absence of substantial evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Petitioner, the Board presumes that you were properly discharged from the Navy. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your desire to upgrade your discharge and your contentions that your punishment was too harsh, that your naval service was acceptable, that you have worked as a respiratory therapist for over 21 years, that you have no criminal law convictions, and that you are a law-abiding citizen. However, the Board found that these factors were insufficient to warrant relief in your case given your service misconduct and your request to be discharged with an OTH for the good of the service in order to avoid trial by court-martial. Regarding your contention that your punishment was too harsh, the Board noted that your punishment was a direct result of your actions, which resulted in you requesting a GOS discharge to escape trial by court-martial. Regarding your contention that your naval service was acceptable, the Board noted that a sailor’s service is characterized at the time of discharge based on performance during the current enlistment. Regarding your contentions that you have worked as a respiratory therapist for over 21 years, have no criminal law convictions, and are a law-abiding citizen, the Board noted while commendable, your post-service conduct does not excuse your conduct while enlisted in the Navy or the basis for your discharge. 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 the 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.