DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 3176-19 Ref: Signature Date 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 21 April 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 7 August 1986. On or about 11 February 1990, you went to Naval Hospital for pain in your left foot and toe. Your X-rays were negative for fractures and you were placed on crutches and prescribed Motrin. During the period from 9 April 1990 to 23 April 1990, after complaining of tenderness on your foot and ankle, you received a bone scan, which was also negative. On 9 May 1990, your commanding officer (CO) referred you for a suicidal intention/suicidal gestures (SI/SG) evaluation due to missing ship’s movement and attempting to hang yourself. The evaluation noted that you had no suicidal or homicidal intensions, and according to a witness, your suicidal gesture appeared to be a form of manipulation. The evaluation determined that you were accountable for your actions. On 15 May 1990, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for absence from appointed place of duty, missing ship’s movement, and malingering by feigning a serious injury to your foot for the purpose of avoiding work. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. After you waived your rights, your CO recommended an other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an OTH discharge due to misconduct. On 1 June 1990, you were discharged. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and your contention that your discharge was unjust because you slipped down the stairs resulting in excruciating foot pain, which prevented you from moving for a period of time and caused you to miss ship’s movement. The board also noted your contention that when you visited the medical clinic for an evaluation of your foot pain, medical personnel only drew blood and said nothing was wrong. However, you assert that the clinic said they saw a hairline fracture in the bone of your foot. The Board concluded that the evidence available for its review was insufficient to support your contentions and that the seriousness of your misconduct outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge. In regard to your contention that your discharge was unjust due to you slipping down the stairs and missing ship’s movement, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to your contention. The record shows that after reporting to the Navy Hospital on several occasions complaining of foot and ankle problems, you received an X-ray and a bone scan, and both were negative for fractures. The Board also noted that you received an SI/SG evaluation due to missing ship’s movement and attempting to hang yourself, which determined you were seeking attention and accountable for own actions. Regarding your contentions that after going to the medical division on the ship, they drew blood and said nothing was wrong, but the clinic said they saw a hairline fracture in the bone of your foot, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contentions. The Board also noted that the record shows that you were notified of and waived your right to present your case to an administrative board (ADB). In doing so, you gave up your first and best opportunity to advocate for retention, assistance, or a more favorable 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, 5/3/2020