Docket No. 6047-19 
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 you did not file your application 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 for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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, together with all material submitted in support thereof, 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 17 September 1976.  You reenlisted on 
8 September 1980.  On 19 March 1981, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) for larceny.  You were sentenced to six months of forfeiture of pay, 4 months of confinement, and reduction in rank (RIR) to E-2.  On 27 February 1982, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that continued until 17 May 1982.  On 28 June 1982, you were convicted by SPCM for the aforementioned UA.  You were sentenced to one month of forfeiture of pay, one month of confinement, RIR to E-1, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).  After appellate review, your discharge was approved and on 21 October 1983, you were discharged with a BCD characterization of service.   
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and your contentions that you had money stolen from you and reported it, but received no assistance from your superiors.  Additionally, you claim you became upset with the way you were being treated; therefore, you went UA.  Lastly, you state that your first discharge was honorable.  The Board was sympathetic to your desire change your characterization of service for your second enlistment, but the Board has no authority to set aside a court-martial conviction and must limit its review to determining whether the sentence should be modified as a matter of fairness or clemency.  In your case, the Board determined no clemency is warranted.  The Board in its review discerned no 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 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,