Docket No: 10737-19 
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 30 September 2020.  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 13 August 1989.  On 18 September 1990, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA), and you were counseled regarding your misconduct.  On 19 December 1990, you received NJP for assault.  You began a period of UA from 31 December 1990 until your surrender on 2 January 1991.  On 22 March 1991, you were notified of the initiation of administrative separation proceedings by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense and misconduct-pattern of misconduct.  You elected your right to consult with counsel and a hearing before an administrative discharge board (ADB).  On 29 March 1991, you were convicted at a summary court-martial (SCM) for three specifications of UA, breaking restriction, and missing ship’s movement.  On 9 April 1991, an ADB convened and recommended your discharge from naval service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct-pattern of misconduct, and misconduct-commission of a serious offense.  On 23 April 1991, your commanding officer concurred with the recommendation of the ADB.  On 10 May 1991, you began a period of UA.  On 22 May 1991, the discharge authority approved and directed your discharge.  On 31 May 1991, you were discharged in absentia with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge as a matter of clemency.  You contend you need assistance that can only be accomplished with an upgrade to your current characterization of service.  You contend you have kept yourself to standard in hopes to undo your mistake.  The Board reviewed the materials you submitted with your application.  After careful consideration of your contentions, the Board determined that your desire to upgrade your discharge was not sufficient to warrant a change to your characterization of service given the misconduct reflected in 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 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. 
 
Sincerely,