Docket No: 7357-20
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 6 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 and began a period of active duty on 9 March 1989.  On 4 March 1993, you were convicted by civilian authorities of driving under the influence.  Subsequently, on  
1 April 1993, you were notified that you were being recommended for administrative separation from the naval service by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  The notification advised that if separation was approved, the least favorable description of service authorized in your case would be under other than honorable (OTH) conditions.  You were advised of, and waived your procedural rights, including your right to consult with and be represented by military counsel, and your right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).  Your commanding officer (CO) then forwarded your package to the separation authority (SA) recommending administrative discharge from the naval service with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service.  The SA approved the discharge recommendation, but directed that you be separated from the naval service with an OTH characterization of service.  Additionally, because of your OTH characterization of service, the SA also directed that upon your separation, you be administratively reduced in rank to the paygrade of E-3.  On 17 May 1993, you were so 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 contention that you did not commit a serious offense to lose your paygrade or to receive an OTH.  You state that you completed your four-year enlistment and continued serving on a two-year extension when you “decided to go ahead and discharge.”  You further state you submitted your paperwork for your discharge when “the order for military cutbacks was issued,” and somehow your paperwork was added to the cutbacks.  You contend that the cutbacks and reduction in the forces were a political decision, which many servicemebers were wronged and suffered from it; and the forces at that time used any and every way to reduce their numbers, and you were one of the victims.  The Board noted you did not submit any documentation or advocacy letters to be considered.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that your misconduct, as evidenced by a civilian 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,