Docket No: 7313-20
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 27 January 2021.  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 on 11 October 1968.  During the period from 4 June to 31 October 1969, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) four times.  The offenses included, two specifications of unauthorized absence totaling 20 days, disobeying a lawful order from a senior petty officer, and larceny of a cassette tape recorder and a transistor radio.  Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement with military authorities.  Initially you requested an administrative discharge board (ADB).  However, on 2 February 1970, you waived your right to an ADB, and as a result, your commanding officer (CO) recommended your general discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement with military authorities.  The discharge authority approved this recommendation and on 12 March 1970, you were discharged. 
 
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 contentions that you joined the Navy to become a machinist mate but never worked in that field and you changed your job to become an aviation mechanic and never worked in that field.  The Board also noted your assertions that all you did was swab decks and paint, you were treated unfairly, and you would like your wife to be able to shop on base due to you being 100% service connected disabled.   
 
The Board noted that you initially requested an ADB but letter waived your rights.  In doing so, you gave up your first and best opportunity to advocate for retention, assistance, or a more favorable characterization of service.  Board also noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention that you were treated unfairly.  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 four NJPs, 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,