Docket No: 4383-19 
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 25 June 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. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 23 August 1988.  On 20 October 1988, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to your place of duty and failure to obey a lawful general regulation when you wrongfully took the swim test for another sailor.  On 28 April 1992, you were formally counseled for making, drawing, or uttering checks without sufficient funds.  On 25 June 1992, you received a second NJP for two instances of failure to go to your appointed place of duty.  Your record is incomplete in that it does not contain all the documents pertaining to your administrative discharge.  Based on your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), however, it appears you submitted a written request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  Prior to submitting this request, you would have been required to confer with qualified military counsel, at which time you would have been advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.  Your request was granted, and your commanding officer was directed to discharge you for the good of the service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  As a result, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction, as well as the potential penalties of a punitive discharge.  You were discharged on 21 September 1992. 
 
The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contention that your OTH discharge was not justified.  Specifically, you contend your record reflects an “outstanding sailor” who “should have been diagnosed with depression.”  You further feel that “so much could have and should have been done to change this outcome.” 
Even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board discerned no procedural defect, error, or injusitice in your discharge.  The Board further determined there was insufficient evidence in your record or submitted with your request to support your contention you were experiencing symptoms of depression while on active duty.  Lastly, the Board noted that, in requesting a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, you would have been required to meet with a military defense counsel and to admit that you were guilty of the misconduct alleged.  Finally, the Board noted you received a benefit from being allowed to separate with an OTH characterization of service instead of risking greater punishment at a court-martial.  The Board thus concluded that there is no probable material error or injustice in your record warranting corrective action. 
 
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,