DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 9462-17 Ref: Signature date 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 14 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 its 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 23 June 1997. On 31 October 1997, you received a certificate of recognition regarding military excellence while serving as a Platoon Leader “Blue Rope.” On 9 December 1997, you received a letter of appreciation. On 14 April 1998, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that terminated with your surrender on 24 April 1998. On 27 April 1998, you began a second period of UA that terminated with your surrender at the end of June 1998. You were discharged from the Navy on 29 July 1998, in lieu of trial by court martial and received an other than honorable characterization of service and a reentry (RE) code of RE-4. In your petition to the Board, you request an upgrade to your characterization of service from other than honorable to honorable. You state that you were racially discriminated against by your chain of command, treated inappropriately in boot camp by multiple RDC’s in boot camp, sexually harassed by a female chief petty officer, and that you were in fear for your personal safety at the time of your military service. You note that you were working as a yeoman prior to your UA, and that a fellow yeoman failed a urinalysis. You state you reported the urinalysis results and were subsequently targeted by the yeoman and his friends. You also contend that your chain of command disapproved of your attendance atand when you routed a chit to attend, you were told to choose another college. Your contention of being treated inappropriately by an RDC and being sexually harassed were fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense’s Memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder” of 3 September 2014 and the "Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Board and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual Harassment" memorandum of 25 August 2017. The Board reviewed your records and the available evidence and determined that there is insufficient information to determine that the allegations contributed to your periods of UA and subsequent administrative discharge. When making its decision the Board also took into consideration that you contend that you were targeted by a yeoman and his friends, who do not appear to be the same individuals who you allege treated you inappropriately and sexually harassed you at boot camp and at your command. The Board carefully reviewed your application and noted your contentions of discrimination, targeting and harassment. The Board noted that as part of the administrative separation process you appear to have been given the opportunity to appear before a court martial to contest the charges against you but you elected to seek an administrative separation in lieu of trial. The Board reviewed the available information in your record and the evidence you submitted and concurred that you exhibited excellent service at the start of your enlistment. However, the Board found there is insufficient evidence to support your contentions of harassment, targeting, and racial discrimination. Absent such information, the Board found there is not enough information to find that your other than honorable discharge was issued in error or injustice. The Board concluded that your periods of UA support the other than honorable characterization of service and that based on the available information, a change is not warranted. 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, 5/14/2019