Docket No: 11358-19 
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 for Correction of Naval Records, 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
  
You enlisted in the Naval Reserve and began a period of active duty on 18 September 1991.  On 8 May 1993, you were discharged with an Honorable discharge.  On 1 March 2000, you began another period of active duty.  On 15 November 2000, NJP was imposed on you for an eight day Unauthorized Absence.  On 24 January 2002, NJP was imposed on you for Urinating in Public.  On 15 August 2002, NJP was imposed on you for Disobeying a Lawful Order and being Drunk and Disorderly.  On 18 March 2003, a Summary Court-Martial convicted you Disrespect towards a Petty Officer, Willfully Disobeying a Petty Officer, and Assault. However, the Convening Authority disapproved the findings of guilty and the adjudged sentence, as the trial admitted hearsay testimony and kept no proper summary of testimony.  Subsequently, administrative separation action was initiated against you.  Your record is incomplete in that it does not contain all the documents pertaining to your administrative discharge.  Absent of such evidence, the Board relied upon the presumption of regularity and presumed that the officials acted in accordance with governing law/policy and in good faith.  On 15 October 2003, you were administratively separated for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, with an Under Other than Honorable Conditions (OTH) characterization of service.  
 
You requested an upgrade of your discharge.  You stated your aunt and uncle, who raised you, died and you started smoking weed because of the stress.  You asserted the discharge was supposed to be upgraded six months after discharge.  You also asserted that you need to be seen by a Veterans Affairs (VA) psychiatrist because you tried to kill yourself, but the VA could not see you because of your characterization of discharge.  You also asserted that your mother and father died within three months of each other, and you lost your mind and tried to get out.   
 
The Board ultimately concluded that these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant a change to his discharge given your misconduct, which resulted in three NJPs.  Finally, the Board noted there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for re-characterization of service due solely to the passage of time. 
  
It is regretted that the circumstances of your husband’s 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,