Docket No: 2168-20 
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 you did not file your application 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 4 September 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. 
 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 7 January 1999.  On 27 July 1999, you began a period of unauthorized absence that continued until you were apprehended by the  Department on 17 February 2000, and returned to military authorities on 23 February 2000.  Subsequently, you requested a good of the service separation in lieu of trial by court-martial.  On 28 March 2000, you were discharged with an under other than honorable characterization of service. 
 
You request an upgrade to your discharge; however, you did not specify the characterization of service you are seeking.  You assert that you were 18 years old when you enlisted and therefore, not mentally developed enough to understand the seriousness of the duty for which you volunteered.  You claim the poor choices you made support your contention and that your immaturity contributed to the foolish decisions that resulted in your failure to complete your enlistment.  Additionally, you claim that when you expressed your preference to go to a court-martial; however, you were told that you were being discharged due to the serious issue you faced in .  Lastly, you state, “I seek justice for this man who was the boy that did not have the mental development, education, knowledge, maturity, or wisdom that this present age and time have rewarded me to experience.”  In support of your petition, you attached copies of your Associate in Science, Bachelor of Arts, and Master of Arts diplomas. 
 
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.  The Board noted that you provided no evidence to support your contentions.  Absent of 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.  Lastly, the Board noted your post-service accomplishments; however, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of time. 
 
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,