Docket No: 3685-19 
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 that 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 May 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, 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 24 March 1987.  You subsequently completed this enlistment with an honorable characterization of service on 21 March 1991 and reenlisted on 22 March 1991.  On 25 February 1992, you were convicted by civilian authorities of disorderly conduct.  On 13 March 1992, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for two specifications of unauthorized absence totaling six days.  On 16 March 1993, you were convicted by civilian authorities of malicious wounding, aggravated malicious wounding, use of a firearm in commission of a felony, and failure to appear. 
 
Subsequently, you were notified of an administrative action to separate you from the naval service because of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and civilian conviction.  You were advised of, and elected your procedural rights, to consult with and be represented by military counsel, and your right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).  An ADB was convened and found that you committed misconduct and recommended administrative discharge from the naval service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  Your commanding officer (CO) concurred with the ADB’s recommendation.  The separation authority approved the recommendation and directed that you be separated from the naval service with an OTH characterization of service.  On 10 November 1993, you were so discharged. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your desire upgrade your discharge.  The Board considered your contention that you served honorably during your tenure in the military, unfortunately, you were involved in an incident that took place off base and it was self-defense.  After careful consideration, the Board concluded that these factors were insufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in an NJP and two civilian convictions.  The Board noted that as a result of your prior honorable service you may be eligible for veteran’s benefits.  You should contact the nearest office of the Department of Veterans Affairs if you desire clarification about your eligibility for those benefits.  Accordingly, under the totality of the circumstances, the Board discerned no probable material error or injustice in the discharge. 
 
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, 
 
  7/9/2020