Docket No: 11580-19 
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 28 October 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, and regulations and policies. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active service on 7 October 1986.  On 18 February 1988, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for assault, and you were counseled regarding your misconduct.  On 5 September 1988, you received NJP for two specifications of unauthorized absence (UA), and you were counseled regarding your misconduct.  On 29 November 1988, you received NJP for another period of UA.  On 1 February 1989, you again received NJP for UA, failure to obey an order, and use of provoking speech or gestures.  On 8 February 1989, an administrative discharge board (ADB) convened.  During the ADB you submitted testimony requesting retention in naval service.  The ADB determined you committed misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, and due to a pattern of misconduct.  Further, the ADB recommended your discharge from naval service with a general characterization of service to be suspended for a period of twelve months.  On 15 February 1989, your commanding officer concurred with the recommendation of the ADB except for the suspension of your discharge from naval service.  On 17 March 1989, the discharge authority approved and directed your discharge with a general characterization of service by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  On 30 March 1989, you received another NJP.  On 11 April 1989, you were discharged with a general characterization of service by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and contention you were encouraged to accept a general discharge or be placed on one year of probation.  You contend you were not represented by counsel, you did not receive a disciplinary hearing, you were not informed of the separation, and this discharge has had an adverse affect on your entire family.  You assert you were granted clemency on 30 August 2016.  The Board found that your record contains documentary evidence that is contrary to your assertion that you did not receive a disciplinary hearing.  The Board noted your continued misconduct following the ADBs recommendation for suspension of your discharge.   
 
The Board also reviewed the materials that you submitted with your application, to include your grant of clemency by .  The Board noted that decisions of clemency reached by other agencies for civil conviction does not affect previous discharge decisions made by the Navy.  The criteria used by those agencies in determining whether a former service member is eligible for clemency are different than that used by the Navy when determining a member’s discharge characterization.  After careful consideration of your contentions, the Board did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants upgrading your characterization of service. 
 
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,