DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 0665-19 
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 15 January 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 service on 28 August 1989.  You were counseled on 23 February 1990 and 3 July 1990 regarding your misconduct and deficiencies (disobeying orders and failure to pay just debts to creditors) and warned of the potential administrative and disciplinary consequences of further misconduct or deficient performance.  On 23 February 1990, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for disobeying a lawful order. On 4 September 1990, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for four specifications of unauthorized absence (UA), and disobeying an order of a petty officer.  On 29 November 1990, you received NJP for two specifications of UA (nine days).  On 25 January 1991, you were convicted at a summary court-martial (SCM) for UA (3-12 December 1990).  On 30 January 1991, you were counseled regarding your misconduct.  On 7 June 1991, you received NJP for being absent from your appointed place of duty on four occasions.  On 20 July 1991, you were counseled again regarding your misconduct. On 21 February 1992, you received a civil conviction for attempting to evade a pursuing peace officer.  On 5 March 1992, you received NJP for failure to obey a lawful order, and UA. Four days later, on 9 March 1992, you again went UA until 30 April 1992.  On 22 April 1992, you missed your ship’s movement.  On 18 May 1992, you received NJP for UA and missing ships movement.  On 30 May 1992, you were notified of the initiation of administrative processing to separate you from the naval service by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense (failure to obey the lawful order of a superior petty officer on two occasions and failure to obey the lawful order of a commissioned officer on a third occasion), and were advised of, and waived, your procedural rights.  You further stated that you did not object to this separation.  Your commanding officer “most strongly” recommended that you be discharged with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  On 18 June 1992, the discharge authority approved the recommendation and directed your discharge with an OTH characterization of service by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense.  On 23 June 1992, you were so discharged. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and your contention that at the time of your enlistment you were young and immature, and an upgrade would allow you to receive VA benefits.  The Board considered your youth and immaturity as factors in your behavior, but concluded that the severity of your misconduct outweighed your current desire to upgrade your discharge.  Further, there is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans benefits.  The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Board.  You may contact the nearest office of DVA concerning your right to apply for benefits. 

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,