DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 1565-19 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 11 February 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. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. You enlisted in the Navy on 26 May 1987. According to the information in your record, on 10 August 1988, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of conspiracy and larceny. You were sentenced to confinement for five months, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). Although the Board lacked your entire service record, the Board relied on a presumption of regularity that you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, at which time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of receiving a BCD. After the BCD was approved at all levels of review, on 30 August 1989, you were discharged. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and your contentions that you were given a BCD for an incident you were not involved in and given a bad deal after joining the Navy straight out of high school. The Board also noted your contentions that you are now a prominent pastor in your city and community, your record is clean, and you have a family. In regard to your contentions that you were given a BCD for an incident you were not involved in and given a bad deal, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention. In regard to your contention that you joined the Navy straight out of high school, the Board noted that the evidence of record did not show that you were not responsible for your conduct or that you should not be held accountable for your actions. In regard to your contention that you are now a prominent pastor in your city and community, your record is clean, and you have a family, the Board noted that while commendable, your post-service conduct does not excuse your conduct while enlisted in the Navy or the basis for your discharge. The Board concluded that the severity of your misconduct outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge. The Board discerned no probable material error or injustice in your 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.