Docket No: 3974-20 
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 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 16 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. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 2 August 1990.  You commenced a period of unauthorized absence (UA) on 8 June 1992 and were declared a deserter on 8 July 1992.  According to your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), it appears that you were in an absent status from 8 June 1992 through 22 March 1993, a period lasting approximately 287 days.  On 2 June 1993, you received non-judicial punishment for desertion with intent to remain away permanently.   
 
On 2 June 1993, you were also notified of administrative action to separate you from the naval service by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  You were advised of, and waived your procedural rights, including your right to consult with and be represented by military counsel, and your right to present your case to an administrative discharge board.  Further, you indicated that you did not object to the separation.  Your commanding officer (CO) then forwarded your package to the separation authority recommending that you be administratively discharged from the naval service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  The separation authority approved your CO’s recommendation and directed your OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, and on 29 June 1993, you were discharged. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your desire to upgrade your discharge.  The Board considered your assertion that your son was being mistreated; his funds were being misused by his caregiver (your mother).  You discovered that your mother and other relatives were also physically and mentally abusing your son.  You requested time off from your command, but your request was denied.  You further state that you contacted your Senator and were advised to go home and he would handle the situation with your command.  Your Senator spoke with his military advisor and they started the early release process, and you were told your discharge would be an OTH character of service discharge and after six months, it would turn into an honorable. 
 
After careful consideration, the Board sympathizes with the circumstances surrounding your son’s care and health, however, the Board ultimately concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case due to the seriousness of your misconduct that involved a significant period of UA.  With regard to your assertion that you were told that your characterization would be upgraded to honorable in six months, the Board advises there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for re-characterization of service due solely to the passage of time.  In view of the forgoing, the Board, in its review, discerned no impropriety or inequity in the discharge. 
 
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,