Docket No: 3792-20 
Date: Ref Signature 

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 4 June 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 and began a period of active duty on 6 September 1989. On 19 April 1990, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA), failure to go to your appointed place of duty, and failure to obey a lawful order.  On 18 June 1990, you were counseled regarding your misconduct and notified that further deficiencies may result in administrative separation.  On 13 December 1991, you received a civil conviction for carrying a concealed weapon.  On 16 January 1992, you received (NJP) for armed robbery.  On 24 January 1992, you were notified of the initiation of administrative separation processing by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense and misconduct-civil conviction, at which point, you elected counsel and to assert your procedural rights.  On 11 February 1992, an administrative discharge board convened and determined you committed misconduct by reason of the commission of a serious offense.  The ADB recommended your discharge with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service to be suspended for twelve months.  On 1 March 1992, your commanding officer recommended your immediate discharge from naval service, with an OTH characterization of service by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense.  On 20 March 1992, the discharge authority concurred with the recommendation of your commanding officer and directed your discharge.  On 28 March 1992, you were discharged with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge.  You contend, in part, that you were not sufficiently informed by your legal counsel of the ramifications for the discharge you received, and the civil court case surrounding your misconduct was dismissed.  Further, you state, the penalty you received was extreme in regard to the offense you committed, and you have been a model citizen since your discharge.  The Board commends your post-service conduct.  The Board noted you failed to provide evidence to support your contention that your civil case was dismissed.  The Board determined you were sufficiently counseled regarding the consequences of administrative separation if you exhibited further misconduct.  The Board noted you were dual processed for separation by reason of civil conviction and the commission of a serious offense. Your subsequent discharge was approved by the separation authority as a result of your misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense that violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  The Board did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants upgrading your characterization of service. 

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.