Docket No: 7147-20/ 1919-07
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.     
 
Because your application was submitted with new evidence not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your application A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 January 2021.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  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 presented as additional evidence, a personal statement.  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, all of your assertions and contentions.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.    
 
Regarding your contentions that your supervisor and commanding officer (CO) told you that you were receiving a humanitarian discharge and your emergency leave was denied, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contentions.  Regarding your contention that having an other than honorable (OTH) discharge hinders your employment opportunities, whether or not you are eligible for employment is a matter under the cognizance of individual organizations or companies, and you should contact that organization or company concerning your right to apply for employment.   
 
Regarding your contention that your legal counsel did not adequately represent you in court, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to your contention.  The record clearly shows that on 10 December 1984, you requested a good of the service (GOS) discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial at which time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.  Your request was granted and your CO was directed to issue an OTH discharge for the good of the service.  As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction, as well as the potential penalties of such a punitive discharge.  Regarding your contention that it has been 35 years since your discharge, the Board noted that there is no provision in law or regulations that allows for re-characterization of a discharge automatically after 35 years, due solely to the passage of time.  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,