Docket No: 3127-18 
Ref: Signature Date 
 

Dear : 
 
This letter 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 for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found that 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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 June 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 7 April 1981.  On 21 September 1982, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for three specifications of unauthorized absence totaling 17 days.  Two days later, on 23 September 1982, you received your second NJP for possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia.  Subsequently, you were notified of proposed administrative separation from the naval service by reason of misconduct and unsatisfactory performance as evidenced by frequent infractions against the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), continuous refusal to cooperate with supervisors, and failure to meet minimum professional working standards.  On 23 February 1983, you acknowledged and waived your procedural rights.  Your commanding officer (CO) recommended that you be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service.  Your CO noted that you had “been counseled repeatedly by [your] supervisor, division chief petty officer, division officer, Command Master Chief, and Executive Officer, all to no avail.”  He further noted that at “the time of separation [you] had several UCMJ violations pending” and that you were a “continuing administrative burden.”  The separation authority directed discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) character of service.  On 2 March 1983, you were so discharged. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your desire to upgrade your discharge, and your contention that you were not a burden to the command and that a sister squadron wanted you to transfer to their squadron, but that your current command at the time would not allow you to transfer, which led to conflict and your discharge status.  The Board concluded that these factors were insufficient to warrant an upgrade of your discharge given the seriousness of your repeated misconduct, which resulted in two NJPs, to include drug related misconduct.  Additionally, characterization of service is often based, in part, on the overall trait average (OTA), computed from marks assigned on a periodic basis.  Your OTA was 2.19, which was below the OTA of 3.0 required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service.  In view of all of the foregoing, the Board, in its review, discerned no probable material error or injustice in your discharge. 
 
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, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  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,