DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE  1001
ARLINGTON,  VA  22204-2490


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 27 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.

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal 
appearance with or without counsel will 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 and began a period of active duty on 14 August 2006. You served for a 
year and two months without disciplinary incident, but during the period from 16 October 2007 
to 5 February 2008, your received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions, with six of 
your offenses occurring in a twenty day period. Your offenses were sleeping on watch, assault, 
unauthorized absence from your command, failure to obey a lawful order, absence from your 
appointed place of duty, dereliction in the performance of duties, using provoking racial words 
and gestures, and insubordinate conduct toward a noncommissioned officer.  After your third 
NJP you received a retention warning that further offenses could result in administrative 
separation. 

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of 
misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions at which time your waived your procedural
right to present your case to an administrative discharge board. Your commanding officer 
recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to minor 
disciplinary infractions. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed 
separation under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on 7 April 2008, you were 
discharged.

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your post service conduct 
and contentions that you had a lack of knowledge of your rights, which you felt you were forced 
to waive, the amount of time served should be considered, the nature of the incident was judged 
unfairly for a first offense, and it was the first and only time you got in trouble in the military 
with no previous captain masts. The Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to 
warrant relief in your case because of your repeated misconduct that resulted in four NJPs in less 
than a six-month period. In regard to your contentions the Board relies on a presumption of 
regularity to support the official actions of public officers and, in the absence of substantial 
evidence to the contrary, will presume that they have properly discharged their official duties.

The Board noted a military attorney was assigned to you to answer your questions regarding 
your separation proceedings. Further, a servicemember may be processed for separation based 
upon a series of at least three, but not more than eight, minor violations of the uniform code of 
military justice. There is no provision of law or regulation that provides for upgrade of a 
characterization of service due to mere passage of time. The Board in its review discerned no 
material error or injustice in the discharge or the characterization of service.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters. 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,

5/21/2019