Docket No: 8457-20 
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 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 12 March 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, 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 25 May 1988.  On 20 March 1991, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA).  On 14 January 1992, you received a second NJP for disobeying a lawful order, resistance, and breach of arrest and escape, destruction of government property, larceny of Navy Exchange property, assault on a Police officer and Navy Exchange personnel, and unlawful entry into a Barracks room.  On 29 January 1992, you were notified of the initiation of administrative separation processing by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense, at which point, you waived counsel and your procedural rights.  On 11 February 1992, your commanding officer (CO) recommended your discharge by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense, with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  On 6 May 1992, you received a third NJP for larceny and forgery.  On 10 March 1992, you were not recommended for reenlistment due to substantial performance, lack of motivation, and total disregard for authority and Naval regulations.  On the same date, 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 contention that you were unfairly treated when receiving an OTH discharge two months before your tour of duty came to an end.  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 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 the 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,