Docket No: 4442-20
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 14 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 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). 
 
On 26 June 1962, you reenlisted in the Navy after serving over two years of honorable service.  On 13 November and 5 December 1962, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for insubordinate conduct and unauthorized absence (UA).  On 17 January and 9 May 1963, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of being absent from your appointed place of duty and assault.  On 9 July 1963 and 21 October 1964, you received NJP for two periods of UA, one of which was for two days.  On 4 December 1964, you were convicted by SCM of drunk and disorderly conduct and damaging government property.  On 14 December 1964, you signed a statement of understanding, acknowledging that you were being considered for administrative discharge because of your frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.  You were advised of, and waived your procedural rights, including your right to be represented by counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board.  Your case was forwarded to the separation authority on 21 December 1964 with the recommendation that you be discharged from the Navy by reason of unfitness.  On 5 January 1965, the separation authority directed that you receive a general discharge due to unfitness.  On 12 January 1965, you were discharged from the Navy with a general characterization of service. 
 
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 prior honorable service, contributions to the Navy, and desire to have your characterization of service changed.  The Board also considered your assertions that your discharge is unjust, prejudiced, and discriminatory.  You assert you received a SCM due to being accused of being intoxicated when returning to base.  However, you state you were not intoxicated, nor had you taken a drink or substance that would cause any form of intoxication.  You further state the Navy never performed a breath or blood test, and was never able to produce any evidence to support the accusation or reasoning behind your court-martial.  Additionally, you state that you are part Native American, and feel your court-martial and discharge were a result of discrimination and prejudice.  Finally, you state you were never allowed to show or produce evidence on your behalf, which would have supported your innocence. Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that your repeated misconduct, as evidenced by your four NJPs and three SCMs, 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,