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

Docket No: 9622-17              
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 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, 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 16 October 1991.  On 8 September 1992, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for four specifications of unauthorized absence, disobeying a direct order, and false official statement.  On 20 October 1992, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, at which time you elected your procedural rights, to consult with legal counsel, and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).  Prior to the commencement of your ADB, you again received NJP for an unauthorized absence, breaking restriction, and false official statement.  On 10 November 1992, the ADB commenced and concluded that you committed misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, by making a false official statement, and recommended you receive an other than honorable (OTH) character of service discharge.  The commanding officer concurred with the ADB’s recommendation.  The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an OTH character of service discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  On 4 December 1992, you were discharged. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge.  The Board also considered your contention that you had a language barrier and you were not offered counsel or legal representation.  The Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief given the seriousness of your repeated misconduct.  In regard to your contention that you were not offered counsel or legal representation the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to your contention.  Additionally, there is no evidence in your record and you provided none to support your contention that you had a language barrier.  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. 

With regard to your contention that your record has the wrong name, the record shows that this was the name under which you served, there is no other evidence in the record, and you provided none beyond this DD149 that you should have had a different name. In the absence of evidence, the Board follows the presumption of regularity and determined no changes were warranted to your service record.
 
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, 


5/17/2019