DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE  1001
ARLINGTON,  VA  22204-2490

Docket No. 6187-19
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 case on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 November 2019. 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.

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Navy in November 1990. On 3 February 1993, a medical board referred you to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for failed back syndrome, lumbar laminectomy/disketomy, and a left hand burn. However, your disability case was suspended when non-judicial punishment was imposed on you on 1 June 1993 for driving under the influence and incapacitation for duty. Based on your misconduct, you were notified of administrative separation processing for commission of a serious offense on 15 June 1993 and you elected an administrative separation board. The administrative separation board met on 23 July 1993 and found the evidence supported a finding of misconduct and recommended your separation with a General characterization of service. You were discharged on 3 November 1993 for commission of a serious offense with a General characterization of service.

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve an upgrade to your characterization of service based on your pending disability case that was suspended after you committed misconduct. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. The Board considered the mitigation evidence you provided and concluded the preponderance of the evidence does not support relief in your case. The Board noted that non-judicial punishment was imposed on your for an offense that qualifies as a serious offense and for which a punitive discharge is authorized under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Based on the seriousness of your misconduct, the Board concluded that even though your active duty service was honest and faithful, the misconduct you committed was significant enough to outweigh the positive aspects of your relatively brief military record. Additionally, the Board noted that the administrative separation board considered your pending disability case when they made their recommendation that you receive a General characterization of service.  Therefore, they determined that you, more likely than not, already received the benefit of the mitigation evidence that you were pending disability processing. Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record.

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,