DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 1137-19 Ref: Signature Date 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 application on its merits. A three-member panel of the Boards, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 14 November 1989. On 15 March 1991, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence. On 12 June 1991, you received your second NJP for an unauthorized absence totaling 11 days. On 27 February 1992, you received your third NJP for an unauthorized absence. Subsequently, you were notified of administrative action to separate you from the naval service. After consulting with legal counsel, you elected to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 29 March 1992, before your ADB convened, you commenced a period of unauthorized absence. On 17 April 1992, your ADB was convened in your absence and recommended that you be administratively separated from the naval service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. On 28 April 1992, you were declared a deserter from the naval service. On 29 April 1992, you surrendered to military authorities after 31 days of unauthorized absence. On 8 July 1992, prior to the discharge authority’s decision, you again commenced a period of unauthorized absence. On 10 July 1992, the separation authority directed your OTH discharge. On 20 July 1992, you surrendered to military authorities after a period of 12 days of unauthorized absence. On 21 July 1992, you were separated with an OTH discharged. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your desire to upgrade your discharge and your contentions that you received racial discrimination in your work place, your First Class Petty Officer called you the “N” word and told you that he would take everything from you, meaning that he would get you kicked out of the military. The Board concluded that these factors were insufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct that resulted in three NJPs and your continued periods of unauthorized absence. In regard to your contention, there is no evidence that racial discrimination was a factor in your case. There is no evidence in the record and you presented none to support your contention. Under the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined there was no probable material error or injustice in the 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.