Docket No: 3778-20            
Ref: Signature Date 

 
Dear :  
 
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 7 December 2000.   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 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 13 October 1986.  On 14 May 1999, you signed a reenlistment contract for a period of four additional years.  On 21 June 2002, you were found guilty at special court martial proceedings for violating Article 92 (on diverse occasions between on or about May 2001 through October 2001, fail to obey a lawful general regulation), Article 134 (between December 2000 through October 2001, knowingly possess three or more images of child pornography, visual images of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, that had been transported in interstate or foreign commerce or that had been produced using materials that had been transported in interstate or foreign commerce in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 2252).  The Court sentenced you to confinement for 89 days, forfeiture of $1,150 pay per month for six months, reduction in rank to E-4, and restriction for a period of 60 days.   On 16 October 2002, you received notice of administrative separation proceedings against you; you waived your right to appear before an administrative separation board.  On 29 October 2002, Commanding Officer, Transient Personnel Unit recommended that you be discharged with an other than honorable discharge characterization.  You were discharged from the Navy on 16 January 2003, on the basis of misconduct, and received an other than honorable discharge and a reentry (RE) code of RE-4. 
 
In your application to the Board, you request that your other than honorable discharge be upgraded to honorable.  You state that your other than honorable discharge is not reflective of a 19-plus year decorated career and your service will speak for itself.  You note that at the time of the only incident of your career, you had been recommended for advancement to the rank of chief (E-7). 
 
The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case including in accordance with the Wilkie Memo.  These included, but were not limited to your desire to upgrade your discharge and your assertion that your discharge is not reflective of your positive contributions to the Navy throughout your career from 1986 until your separation.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that the seriousness and nature of your misconduct of knowing possession of child pornography outweighed these mitigating factors.  The Board found that your other than honorable discharge was supported by the misconduct reflected in your record, and does not reflect an error or an injustice.  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,