Docket No: 11027-19 
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 was 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 16 November 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, applicable statutes, regulations, and policies to include the 25 July 2018 Under Secretary of Defense Memo on Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military / Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations. 
  
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 18 July 1995.  On 7 February 1997, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed on you for Underage Drinking.  On 24 July 1997, NJP was imposed on you for Unauthorized Absence, Violation of a Lawful Order, and Underage Drinking.  On 27 May 1998, NJP was imposed on you for Violation of a Lawful Order and Drunk and Disorderly. On 28 January 1999, NJP was imposed on you for Disobedience of a Lawful Order and Drunk and Disorderly onboard USS   .  Subsequently, administrative separation action by reason of Misconduct – Pattern of Misconduct was initiated against you.  On 5 February 1999, you waived counsel and an administrative board.  On 9 February 1999, your Commanding Officer recommended you be administratively separated with an Under Other than Honorable Conditions (OTH) discharge.  On 16 February 1999, the Separation Authority directed you be administratively separated with an OTH.  On 17 February 1999, you were discharged with an OTH.   
 
You requested an upgrade of your discharge to Honorable. You said you made a few mistakes at the end of your term, for which you are sorry. You asserted you were young and immature, but are older now. You also asserted you love your country and want your children to be proud of you with an honorable discharge.  Finally, you asserted you were unfairly discharged from the Navy as you only had a few months left when you received an under other than honorable discharge.  In reviewing the circumstances of your separation and characterization of service, the Board considered the totality of the circumstances to determine whether relief is appropriate today in the interests of justice in accordance with guidance provided by the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Wilkie Memo of 25 July 2018).  Accordingly, the Board considered and acknowledged the length of your active duty service to our nation and your post-discharge achievements.  However, even in light of the USD Memo, the Board still concluded given the totality of the circumstances, your request does not merit relief.,  
 
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,