DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 4740-18 Ref: Signature date Dear 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 for Correction of Naval Records (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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 July 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 5 December 1977. During the period from 14 November 1978 to 6 April 1979, your received three nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for four periods of unauthorized absence (UA) and disobeying a lawful order. On 19 July 1979, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of two specification of UA totaling 35 days. On 11 September 1979, you received NJP for UA, failure to obey an order, and two instances of disobedience. On 13 September 1979, you were notified administrative discharge action had been initiated due to your frequent involvement with military authorities. On 20 September 1979, you received a fifth NJP for being absent from your appointed place of duty. On 26 September 1979, you elected to have your case heard before an administrative discharge board (ADB). However, on 27 September 1979, you and your commanding officer (CO) signed a memorandum of agreement that provided that you were recommended for a general discharge and would waive your right to an ADB. On 28 September 1979, your CO forwarded your case to the separation authority with the recommendation that you receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 9 October 1979, the separation authority did not concur with your CO’s recommendation, and stated they were not bound by agreements entered into if the offenses for which a member is being processed for falls within the category of offenses which normally result in a discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions. The agreement was disapproved and your CO was directed to offer you the opportunity to execute another Statement of Awareness and Election of Privileges. On 15 October 1979, you signed another Statement of Awareness waiving your right to have your case heard before an ADB. On 4 November 1979, the separation authority directed that you received an other than honorable (OTH). You received an OTH discharge on 15 November 1979. The Board carefully considered your request to upgrade your discharge and assertion that you were young, stupid and doing drugs at the time, and, as you grew older, you realized what a foolish young man you were and have regretted it ever since. The Board, however, concluded these factors and assertion were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct which resulted in five NJPs, and a SCM conviction. The Board discerned no 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 the 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.