Docket No: 8254-20
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  10 February 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). 
 
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. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 21 September 1987.  On 27 March 1989, you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for 10 days.  On 13 March 1990, a special court-martial (SPCM) convicted you of two specifications of UA totaling 340 days and two specifications of missing ship’s movement.  You were sentenced to confinement for 90 days, forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).  After the BCD was approved at all levels of review, you were discharged on 30 April 1991.  
 
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 you did not receive treatment for your drug addiction, you did not receive a fair trial by your peers, your record was good prior to discharge, it has been 30 years since you were discharged, and you need Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) benefits.  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 your SPCM conviction, outweighed these mitigating factors.  Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief.  
 
In regard to your contention that you did not receive treatment for your drug addiction, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to your contention.  The record clearly shows that you declined DVA rehabilitation for alcohol and drug dependency prior to discharge.  In regard to your contention that you did not receive a fair trial by your peers, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to your contention.  The record clearly shows that a SPCM convicted you of two specifications of UA totaling 340 days, two specifications of missing ship’s movement, and directed you receive a BCD.  In regard to your contention that you had a good record prior to discharge, the Board noted that a Sailor’s service is characterized at the time of discharge based on performance during the current enlistment.  In regard to your contention it has been 30 years since you were discharged, the Board noted that there is no provision in law or regulations that allows for re-characterization of a discharge automatically, due solely to the passage of time.  Regarding your contention that you need DVA benefits, whether or not you are eligible for benefits is a matter under the cognizance of the DVA, and you should contact the nearest office of the DVA concerning your right to apply for benefits.  If you have been denied benefits, you should appeal that denial under procedures established by the DVA. 
   
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,