DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
            
Docket No: 5267-19                                   
Ref: Signature Date 

This is in reference to your application of 11 May 2019 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 2 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, 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 16 February 1995.  On 14 February 1996, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence.  On 25 March 1996, you received your second NJP for four specifications of failure to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty.  On 24 April 1996, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of larceny.  Subsequently, you were notified of an administrative action to separate you from the naval service. You were advised of, and elected your procedural right, to consult with military legal counsel.  After consulting with military legal counsel, you waived your procedural right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).  Your commanding officer (CO) recommended that you be administratively discharged from the naval service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  The discharge authority approved the CO’s recommendation and directed that you be discharged with an OTH characterization of service for misconduct.  On 5 June 1996, you were so discharged. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your desire to upgrade your discharge.  The Board considered your contention that you were young, immature and naïve.  When you enlisted into the Navy you lacked life goals and experience.  You believe that you were misled at the time and made to believe that an “other than honorable” discharge was no big deal, just accept it, and it will automatically be upgraded in 6 to 12 months.
 
The Board considered your youth and immaturity as a factor in your behavior, however, concluded that these factors were insufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct that resulted in two NJPs and a SCM conviction.  Regarding your contention that you were misled, there is no evidence in your record and you presented none to support your contention.  Additionally, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of time.  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, 

4/18/2020