Docket No: 1103-20 
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 for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 3 October 1983.  During the period from 28 March to 30 May 1984, you received four non-judicial punishments (NJP) for three specifications of unauthorized absence totaling 29 days, absence from appointed place of duty and wrongful disobedience of a lawful order from a commission officer.  Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  After waving your rights, your commanding officer (CO) recommended discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct.  On 20 June 1984, you were discharged.  
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge, and your contentions that it has been 36 years since your discharge and you were told your discharge would changed to honorable after six months.  The Board concluded that your repeated misconduct outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge.  

Regarding your contention that it has been 36 years since your discharge and you were told your discharge would change to honorable after six months, the Board noted that there is no provision in law or regulations that allows for re-characterization of a discharge automatically, due solely to the passage of time.   
 
In reviewing the circumstances of your separation and characterization of service, the Board considered the totality of the circumstances to determine whether relief is appropriate today in the interests of justice in accordance with guidance provided by the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Wilkie Memo of 25 July 2018).  Accordingly, the Board considered and acknowledged your positive contributions to the service, the length of your active duty service to our nation, and your post-discharge achievements.  However, even in light of the USD Memo, the Board still concluded given the totality of the circumstances, your request does not merit relief. 
 
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 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,