Docket No: 6729-20            
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 16 October 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). 
 
You enlisted in the Navy Reserve on 7 November 2002 for a period of eight years of service beginning in the paygrade of E-3.  Your record indicates that on 30 April 2003, Administrative Remarks were entered into your service record indicating that you were being administratively separated on the same day due to failure to complete all requirements of the APG program, and that you were being reverted to the permanent rate of SN.   
 
In your application to the Board, you ask that your discharge be upgraded from general to honorable.  You state that you believe your general characterization of service is in error because you were “told not to attend by a medical doctor and (your) recruiter.”  You state you were having trouble breathing on a weekend you attended, went to medical, and were informed you had asthma.  You assert you were then informed not to attend future months, and believed you would receive an honorable discharge or a medical separation.  You state you did not question “the title or discharge” due to ignorance. 

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 desire to upgrade your discharge and contention that you had a medical condition that resulted in you being told not to participate in the Navy Reserve.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  The Board noted you did not provide supporting information such as medical documentation of the asthma diagnosis or a written statement from anyone in your chain of command regarding the directive not to participate in the Reserve.  Absent such information, the Board relied on the information in your record.  Your History of Assignments and Enlistment Contract indicate you enlisted on 7 November 2002, but do not provide an account of your participation in reserve drills or active duty training.  The Board found that you did not provide sufficient information to support the issuance of an honorable discharge or to indicate that a medical separation or discharge would have been appropriate.  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,