Docket No: 0683-20 
Ref: Signature Date 

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 21 May 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, applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You reenlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 5 February 1982. On 24 March 1982, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for possession of marijuana and were awarded forfeiture of pay, restriction, extra duties, and reduction in rank to E-3.  On 14 April 1982, you were counseled that further deficiencies in performance or conduct could result in judicial proceedings and administrative separation.  On 12 January 1983, you received NJP for wrongful possession of an unauthorized ID card.  On 29 March 1985, you were counseled regarding your unsatisfactory performance and conduct and again warned about the potential for administrative separation.  On 19 September 1985, you received NJP for assault.  On 8 October 1985, administrative discharge action was initiated due to a pattern of misconduct.  After being afforded all of your procedural rights, you consulted with Counsel and elected to have a hearing before an administrative discharge board (ADB).  On 14 November 1985, an ADB unanimously determined you committed misconduct and recommended separation with a general characterization of service.  On 16 January 1986, you were arrested by civilian authorities in  for living off the earnings of a prostitute, securing a person for prostitution, and possession of a concealed weapon.  On 26 February 1986, you were discharged with a general characterization of service. 


You request the Board upgrade your discharge to honorable.  You assert that during your second enlistment, you were experiencing severe family problems that directly affected your performance.  In 1983 you were shot while off-duty due to your family issues.  You claim that at the time you did not feel it was appropriate to bring these issues to your command.  Lastly, you state you want to clear your name and receive the benefits you feel that you have earned. 

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 that resulted in three NJPs, two of which occurred after you had been warned about the potential for administrative separation.  Further, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for recharacterization of service solely due 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 the 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.