Docket No: 0053-20                                                                                        
Ref: Signature Date           

 
Dear 
 
 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 you did not file your application 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 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 16 August 1984.  On 20 June 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for dereliction of duty and were awarded restriction and reduction in rank (RIR).  The RIR was suspended for three months.  On 23 August 1985, you received a second NJP for wrongful use of a controlled substance and were awarded forfeiture of pay, extra duties and RIR.  On 30 August 1985, you received a third NJP for unauthorized absence (UA), disobeying a commissioned officer, and misbehavior of a sentinel.  You were awarded forfeiture of pay, restriction and RIR.  On 5 September 1985, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  After being afforded all of your procedural rights, you did not elect to consult with or be represented by counsel, and you did not elect to present your case before an Administrative board.  Your case was then forwarded to the separation authority with a recommendation that you receive a discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions.  The separation authority approved your separation, and on 23 September 1985, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service. 
You request an upgrade to your discharge; however, you did not specify the characterization of service you are seeking.  Additionally, you assert that the narrative reason for your separation is “Misconduct - Commission of a Serious Offense,” although you were never court-martialed or convicted of a crime or misconduct.  You claim, “I did sign a large stack of papers that I had no idea of what I was signing.  I was so stressed out and just wanted to be done that I just signed anything without reading what I was signing.  After signing the documents, I was out of the Navy in 23 days. They keep all my uniforms and everything I was issued.” 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and contentions, and concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct.  With respect to your contention that you were not convicted of a crime or misconduct by court-martial, the Board noted you were found guilty of misconduct including dereliction, drug use, UA, disobedience, and misbehavior of a sentinel at three NJP hearings.  Additionally, the Board noted that you were notified in writing regarding your administrative separation rights and processes, and the consequences of an unfavorable discharge.  However, you admit that you did not even read the documents because you wanted to be discharged.  Further, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of time. 
 
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,