Docket No: 6420-20
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.     
 
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.     
 
The Board determined that your personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 26 November 1980.  On 5 May 1982, you were convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM) for an unauthorized absence (UA) of 113 days.  On 26 August 1982, you were convicted by civil authorities for possession of marijuana and failure to appear.  On 30 October 1982, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for larceny.  On 1 December 1982, you received NJP for disrespect to a superior petty officer.  On 8 August 1983, you received NJP for UA and for violating a general order prohibiting drug paraphernalia.  On 11 August 1983, you were notified of the initiation of administrative discharge proceedings on the basis of misconduct due to possession of drug paraphernalia, and you waived your right to an administrative discharge board.  On 7 October 1983, you were discharged with an other than honorable characterization of service.  On 10 April 1985, the Navy Discharge Review Board denied your petition to upgrade your discharge.  On 24 October 1987, this Board denied your petition to upgrade your discharge.  In each of these cases, you contended, in essence, that you were young and that the discharge you received was too severe based on your youth. 
 
The Board carefully reviewed the materials that you provided and carefully considered your contentions, including that you were young and inexperienced, especially in places like Rota, Spain.  You asserted that you love this country, and that you were a country boy from Alabama when this happened.  You would like to get into the compensated work therapy program with the Department of Veterans Affairs.  After careful consideration, the Board did not find an error or injustice that would justify upgrading your characterization of service.   
 
The Board also 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 desire to upgrade your discharge and your contentions described above.  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 NJPs and SCM conviction, 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,