Docket No: 11622-19 
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 Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 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 3 November 1989.  On 31 October 1990, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disobedience and dereliction and were awarded extra duties.  On 31 January 1992, you received a second NJP for failure to obey orders and assault and were awarded a verbal reprimand, restriction, extra duties, and reduction in rank (RIR).  The RIR was suspended for six months.  On 3 April 1992, you received a third NJP for unauthorized absence and failure to obey orders and were awarded a verbal reprimand, restriction, extra duties, and forfeiture of pay.  The forfeiture of pay was suspended for six months.  On 29 April 1992, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct.  After being afforded all of your procedural rights, you waived them, and your case was forwarded to the separation authority for review.  Your commanding officer (CO) recommended that you receive a general discharge and the separation authority approved your separation from the Navy.  On 3 June 1992, you were discharged with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. 
 
You request the Board upgrade your discharge to honorable.  You assert an error made by an administrative clerk.  Your CO recommended a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service.  You believe the error in your record is due to personal differences with your Leading Chief Petty Officer who “took it upon himself to go to the admin clerk and influence a change in my discharge that was put in by my CO.”  In support of your petition, you attached a personal statement.  You state your brother was murdered and his killer was never caught.  The situation had a major impact on you and resulted in the deterioration of your performance and conduct.  You state that although your unit was about to be deployed, your mental state was not where it needed to be in order to deploy.  Additionally, you attached seven letters of support and character. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and contentions and concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in three NJPs.  The Board found that the separation authority did not concur with your CO’s recommendation for a general discharge.  Additionally, the Board noted that on 30 January 2020, you were notified that your request for an upgrade based on your assertion that you are suffering from mental illness incurred during active duty is not supported by any medical or clinical evidence.  The Board advised you to submit any evidence to support your claim within 60 days; however, to date, no additional documentation has been received.  Absent such evidence, the Board relied upon the presumption of regularity and presumed that the officials acted in accordance with governing law/policy and in good faith.  Finally, the Board found no error in the records.   
 
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. 
 
Sincerely, 
 
6/23/2020