DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 10192-17 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 found the evidence submitted was 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 for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 February 2019. The names and votes of the members of the panel 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 this 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations and policies. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 26 October 1982. During the period from 7 June 1983 to 23 February 1984, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions for desertion, four periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 123 days, absent from your appointed place of duty, and wrongful use of marijuana as identified through your admission. On 28 February 1984, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and pattern of misconduct, at which time you waived your procedural rights, to consult with counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Your Commanding Officer (CO) recommended discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions. The discharge authority directed an OTH characterization of service, and on 7 May 1984, you were discharged. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge, and your community service after discharge. The Board also considered your contentions that you were told that if you did not commit any crimes or get into any trouble for a year your discharge would become honorable; additionally, you tried to transfer to another ship several times, you spoke with several counselors about your problems, who told you to go UA. The Board commended your good service to your community. In regard to your contention that you were told to go UA, there is no evidence in the record and you submitted none to support your contention. Further, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for re- characterization of service due solely to the passage of time. The Board concluded that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant relief given the seriousness of your repeated misconduct. After a thorough review of the facts and circumstances unique to your case, the Board discerned no impropriety or inequity in the discharge action that would warrant a change in your characterization of service. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously 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, 4/29/2019 Executive Director