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

Docket No: 1763-20              
Ref: Signature date 

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 23 April 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 on 15 June 1998.  In the summer of 2000, you began participation in the Broadened Opportunity for Officer Selection and Training (BOOST) program but voluntarily disenrolled from the program in November of the same year.  After disenrollment, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that lasted until your apprehension on 27 January 2001.  On 29 January 2001, you submitted a written request for discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the UA period.  Prior to submitting this request, you declined an opportunity to confer with a qualified military lawyer, at which time you would have been advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.  Your request was granted, and your Commanding Officer was directed to issue an other than honorable (OTH) discharge 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 15 February 2001, you were discharged. 

The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contention that the facts surrounding your service, discharge, and life warrant an upgrade to your characterization of service and change to your reentry code.  Additionally, the Board considered your detailed application of the Wilkie Memorandum to the facts of your discharge.  The Board considered your difficult upbringing and lack of a consistent support system.  Specifically, the Board considered your explanation that you were a ward of the state and in the Department of Children and Family Services only nine months prior to enlisting in the Navy at the age of 17.  The Board also considered your initial years of service which resulted in your noteworthy acceptance into BOOST.  Further, the Board considered your admission that the months in BOOST were a “confusing time” which resulted in your being ashamed of your performance and ultimately disenrolling from the BOOST program.  Additionally, the Board considered each of the contentions under the standards of the Wilkie memorandum such as your candor, the aggravating and mitigating facts, the severity of your misconduct, whether the misconduct may have been youthful indiscretion, and your acceptance of responsibility and remorse for your in-service misconduct.  The Board also considered the degree to which the requested relief was necessary, your post-service character and reputation, and evidence of your rehabilitation.  Lastly, the Board considered your in-service and stated post-service performance record and job history.  The Board, noting you did not submit any supporting documentation or advocacy letters, did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants upgrading your characterization of service or changing your reentry code to allow for reenlistment.   

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, 

5/27/2020