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

Docket No: 6076-17 
FEB 11 2019 

Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, of the 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 three­member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 October 2018. 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 and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 22 February 1980. On 4 March 1983 and 12 November 1983, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for two periods of unauthorized absence. On 23 February 1984, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of an unauthorized absence totaling 31 days. You were sentenced to confinement, forfeiture of pay, reduction in rank, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). After the BCD was approved at all levels of review, you were discharged on 30 April 1985. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and contentions that you were harassed by Naval Investigative Service, found not guilty at a general court-martial (GCM), were put through a lot of mental abuse, received no counseling, served honorably for four years, and supporting documentation from a psychiatrist that you should have an upgraded discharge. The Board has no authority to set aside a court­martial conviction and must limit its review to determining whether the sentence should be modified as a matter of clemency. The Board reviewed your record and the documentation submitted as part of your 1984 United States Clemency Board review, but determined no clemency is warranted based on the repeated nature of your misconduct. The Board found evidence in your record that confirms you were found not guilty at a GCM in May 1983, and that you sought help from the medical clinic in August 1983. You were given a provisional diagnosis of acute situational anxiety but refused a follow-up consult with a mental health provider. In regards to your contention that you served four years honorably, the Board noted your two NJPs and SPCM conviction. Lastly, the Board in its review discerned no impropriety or inequity in your discharge. 

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. 

Executive Director