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

Docket No. 7520-18 
Ref: Signature Date 

Dear  :

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 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 case on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 May 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 and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.  

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in June 1993.  Non­judicial punishment was imposed on you for assault and communicating a threat on 13 August 1993.  A second non-judicial punishment was imposed on you for wrongful possession of alcohol on 23 December 1993.  You were again issued non-judicial punishment on 22 November 1994 for unauthorized absence, false official statement, and forgery.  Followed by another non­judicial punishment on 9 January 1995 for wrongful possession of alcohol and consumption of alcohol under the age of 21.  Finally, you were found guilty by a summary court-martial on 26 January 1995 for 11 specifications of failure to go to restricted musters.  Based on your misconduct, you were notified of administrative separation processing on 20 March 1995 and discharged for pattern of misconduct on 10 July 1995 with an Other than Honorable characterization of service. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a disability discharge and upgrade to your characterization of service.  You assert that you were suffering from depression that negatively impacted your performance and were denied treatment.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  First, the Board found no evidence that you were diagnosed with depression while on active duty or qualified for referral to the Disability Evaluation System.  Second, based on your history of misconduct and the lack of any evidence that showed you were not mentally responsible for your misconduct, the Board concluded you were properly administratively separated for your pattern of misconduct.  Third, based on your administrative separation for misconduct, the Board determined you were not eligible for disability processing since misconduct processing supersedes disability processing.  Fourth, based on your four non-judicial punishments and one summary court-martial conviction, the Board concluded you were appropriately assigned an Other than Honorable characterization of service. The Board viewed your misconduct as a significant departure from the conduct expected of a Sailor.  Additionally, multiple offenses for which you were punished were considered serious by the Board since they qualified for punitive discharges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence.  New evidence is evidence not previously 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, 


6/4/2019