DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 4936-18 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 31 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, 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 30 October 1989. During the period from 1 February 1991 to 14 February 1992, you received three nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for three periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling five days, and failing to go to your appointed place of duty. Additionally, you were formally counseled concerning 18 October 1991 UA, and warned that further misconduct, could result in administrative discharge action. On 25 February 1992, you were notified of administrative action to separate you from the naval service due to a pattern of misconduct. You elected not to consult with counsel, elected to obtain copies of the documents being sent to the separation authority, and waived all other rights, including your right to request that your case be heard before an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 3 March 1992, your commanding officer (CO) forwarded your case to the separation authority recommending that you receive and other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service stating, in part, that you had become a “continuing problem” within the command, had “failed to meet even the most basic requirements of the U.S. Navy,” and had become an “administrative burden.” On 21 March 1992, the separation authority notified your CO that the Letter of Notification was improper and that board procedures should have been used. On 25 March 1992, you were issued the proper Letter of Notification due to a pattern of misconduct. Again, you elected not to consult counsel, and waived all other rights, including your right to request that your case be heard before an ADB or submit a statement on your own behalf. On 31 March 1992, the separation authority agreed with your CO’s recommendation and directed that you receive an OTH discharge due to a pattern of misconduct. You received your OTH discharge on 10 April 1992. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in you case, including your record of service and desire to upgrade your discharge. The Board also considered your assertions that you received an OTH discharge due to uncontrollable factors in your life, and that you feel your service in the Navy was not dishonorable. You also contend that you believe your discharge was inequitable due to the fact that your family medical problems impaired your ability to serve. You state that you went home on emergency leave due to your mother being ill, requested a leave extension that was denied, that you missed your flight back and had to take a bus, and ultimately returned a few days after your emergency leave expired. You also state that you should have reported to the nearest Navy Reserve Unit and applied for a Humanitarian Transfer of Humanitarian Temporary Additional duty, so you could continue to serve and be near your mother. You contend that your discharge was improper because your chain of command failed to properly advise you of your appeal rights. However, your service record does not contain, and you failed to provide, any evidence to support your contentions. The record shows that on two occasions you were advised in writing of your right to consult with legal counsel, and declined to do so. Accordingly, the Board concluded that these factors were insufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct, which resulted in three NJPs, one of which was after you had been counseled and warned of the consequences of further misconduct. 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.