Docket No: 7550-20
Ref: Signature Date                                                                                   

    
Dear   
 
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 was denied.     
 
The Board determined that your personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
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 14 December 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 and began a period of active duty on 2 December 1976.  On 16 July 1981 you were honorably discharged, and you reenlisted on 17 July 1981.  On 30 June 1977, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed on you for Unauthorized Absence (UA).  On 8 September 1977, NJP was again imposed on you for UA.  On 26 July 1978, NJP was imposed on you for Assault.  On 8 September 1978, NJP was imposed on you for Violation of a Ship’s Regulation.  On 18 May 1980, NJP was imposed on you for Communicating a Threat and Assault.  On 5 November 1982, NJP was imposed on you for Violation of Lawful Order and Wrongful Possession of Marijuana.  You were issued a Retention warning.  On 14 April 1983, NJP was imposed on you for Wrongful Use of Marijuana and False Official Statement.  On 31 May 1983, NJP was imposed on you for Violation of Lawful Order and Failure to Go to Your Appointed Place of Duty.  On 25 September 1984, NJP was imposed on you for False Official Statement and Soliciting Another to Impersonate a United States Navy Medical Corps Officer.  On 27 November 1984, NJP was imposed on you for Failure to Obey Lawful Order.   
 
Subsequent to the 25 September 1984 NJP, on 27 September 1984, administrative separation action by reason of Frequent Involvement with of a Discreditable Nature with Military Authorities, was initiated against you.  On 9 October 1984, you consulted counsel and requested an administrative board (ADB).  On 21 November 1984, an ADB found a basis for your administrative separation and recommended you be separated under Other than Honorable Conditions (OTH).  On 14 December 1984, your Commanding Officer (CO) forwarded your package to the Separation Authority (SA) recommending you be separated an OTH.  On 27 December 1984, the SA directed your administrative separation with an OTH discharge.  On 11 January 1985, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service.  
 
You requested an upgrade of your discharge to Honorable.  You asserted you were discharged with an OTH and it was unjust and biased.  You also asserted you were discharged without a formal hearing or due process.  In addition, you asserted you were never told why you were being discharged.  You also asserted that in July 1983, you were involved in an alternation and sustained injuries that required you to go on medical hold, but never got to tell the CO about the injuries as someone called him pretending to be the doctor.  Finally, you asserted that based on the circumstances and the time passed, your discharge should be changed to honorable.  The Board concluded these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge.  The Board noted that you requested and received an ADB, and were informed of the basis for administrative separation and the recommended characterization of service at the board.   
 
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.  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 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,