DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 3586-20 Ref: Signature Date This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code. After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted 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 9 December 2020. The names and votes of the panel members 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 the 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, to include the 25 August 2017 guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Kurta Memo) and the 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). You reenlisted in the Navy and began a period of active service on 19 May 1981. On 27 April 1983, you were convicted at a special court martial (SPCM) for unauthorized absence (UA). On 1 June 1983, you were counseled regarding your failure to pay just debts, and numerous complaints of non-payment received by your command. You began a period of UA on 15 August 1983 until your surrender on 18 August 1983. On 26 August 1983, you were notified of your substandard service. On 29 August 1983, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for UA. On 31 August 1983, you were notified of your substandard service. On 2 September 1983, you were counseled regarding your substandard performance. On 20 June 1984, you were convicted at a SPCM for UA. On 12 July 1984, you were notified of the initiation of administrative separation proceedings by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, and misconduct due to pattern of misconduct, at which point, you elected your right to consult with counsel and a hearing before an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 5 September 1984, an ADB convened and recommended your discharge from naval service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, and misconduct due to pattern of misconduct. On 14 September 1984, your commanding officer recommended your discharge from naval service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. On 30 September 1984, the discharge authority approved and directed your discharge. On 9 October 1984, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct. The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case in accordance with the Wilkie Memo. These included, but were not limited to, your desire to upgrade your discharge and contention your court martial was justified, many years have passed since your discharge, and your first four years of service were exemplary. Further, you request mercy from the Board due to your advanced age and poor health. The Board reviewed all the materials you submitted with your application. Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief. Specifically, the Board determined that your misconduct, as evidenced by your NJP and two SPCMs, outweighed these mitigating factors. Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief. 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, Executive Director