Docket No: 5743-19 
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 15 July 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, 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 5 July 1990.  During the period from 12 June 1992 to 5 May 1993, you received two non-judicial punishments (NJP) for two specifications of wrongfully stealing phone calling cards, wrongfully opening and stealing mail, and wrongfully obtaining service from AT&T with intent to defraud.  On 2 April 1993, a summary court-martial (SCM) convicted you of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling three days.  On 21 April 1993, civil authorities convicted you of using offensive and provoking words in a public place.  On 11 March 1994, a general court-martial (GCM) convicted you of larceny of 18 checks, larceny of an Armed Force ID card, and 16 specifications of writing checks with the intent to defraud.  You were sentenced to confinement for one year, forfeiture of pay, reduction to E-1, and a dishonorable discharge (DD). 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge, contentions that you are requesting a discharge upgrade based on your behavior and performance since discharge, your dishonorable discharge (DD) was too harsh, you were not the only Sailor involved, but the only one punished, and you need Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) benefits.  The Board also noted your contention that you are requesting leniency due to the amount of time that has passed since discharge.  However, the Board concluded that your misconduct and GCM conviction outweighed your desire upgrade your discharge. 
 
In regard to your contention that you are requesting a discharge upgrade based on your behavior and performance since discharge, the Board noted while commendable, your post service conduct does not excuse your conduct.  In regard to your contention that your DD was too harsh, the Board noted that your punishment was a direct result of your actions, which resulted in two NJPs, a SCM, a civil conviction, and a GCM conviction.  In regard to your contention that you were not the only Sailor involved, but the only one punished, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention.  In regard to your contention you need benefits from the Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA), the board noted that whether or not you are eligible for benefits is a matter under the cognizance of the DVA, and you should contact the nearest office of the DVA concerning your right to apply for benefits.  If you have been denied benefits, you should appeal that denial under procedures established by the DVA.  Regarding your contention that you are requesting leniency due to the amount of time that has passed since discharge, the Board noted that there is no provision in law or regulations that allows for re-characterization of a discharge, due solely to the passage of time. 
 
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,