DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S COURTHOUSE ROAD SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490 
              
Docket No: 11049-19 
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 2 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, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 30 December 1976.  On 31 October 1977, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence and disobeying a lawful order.  On 9 March 1978, you received your second NJP for an unauthorized absence for the period from 21 February 1978 to 5 March 1978, totaling 12 days and wrongful possession and use of marijuana.   
 
Your record reflects four separate periods of unauthorized absence for the period from 17 April 1978 to 20 July 1978, totaling 94 days, 25 July 1978 to 13 February 1979, totaling 203 days, 15 February 1979 to 19 June 1979, totaling 124 days, and 3 August 1979 to 10 April 1980, totaling 251 days.  Unfortunately, your administrative separation documents are not in your electronic service record.  However, based on the information contained on your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), you presumably submitted a voluntary written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial.  Prior to submitting this voluntary discharge request, you would have conferred with a qualified military lawyer, you would have been advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.  As part of this discharge request, you would have admitted guilt and acknowledged that your characterization of service upon discharge would be other than honorable (OTH).  On 3 July 1980, you were discharged from the naval service with an OTH characterization of service.   
 
The Board noted that on your DD Form 214, the narrative reason for separation is “Good of the Service,” and your separation code is “KFS,” which corresponds to a separation for the Good of the Service administrative discharge.   
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, including your desire to upgrade your discharge.  The Board considered your contention that you took the OTH discharge because your father was dying and that was the quickest way to see your father.  You further state that, six months after your discharge you were granted an upgrade of your character of service to honorable per Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits.  After careful consideration, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct, significant periods of unauthorized absence and subsequent discharge at your request to avoid trial by court-martial.  The Board relies on a presumption of regularity to support the official actions of public officers and, in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary (as is the case at present), will presume that they have properly discharged their official duties.  Accordingly, under the totality of the circumstances, the Board discerned no probable material error or injustice in the discharge. 
 
Be advised, decisions reached by the VA to determine if former servicemembers rate certain VA benefits do not affect previous discharge decisions made by the Navy.  The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former servicemember is eligible for benefits are different than that used by the Navy when determining a member’s discharge characterization. 
 
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,