Docket No: 6325-19 
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 for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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 on 4 October 1990.  During the period from 3 April to 21 August 1991,  you received two non-judicial punishments (NJP) for two specifications of derelict in the performance of duty, two specifications of underage drinking, two specifications of incapacitated for the performance of duty, missing ship’s movement, and unauthorized absence (UA).  During the period from 23 September to 25 November 1991, civil authorities convicted you of public intoxication and shoplifting and you received NJP for UA, failure to obey a lawful order, and possession of alcohol while under age.  On 16 January 1992, a medical evaluation determined that you did not require detoxification, you were not dependent on drugs, and not an alcoholic.  Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  After waving your rights, your commanding officer (CO) recommended discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct.  On 20 February 1992, you were discharged.  
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as character letters, your desire to upgrade your discharge, contentions that you were told that your discharge would automatically be upgraded after six months, you were young, immature, did not know how to address your problems, and it was your first time being away from home.  The Board noted your contentions that you have been married for 26 years with kids and grandkids, participated in charity events, a church member, employed in the IT field for over 20 years, have Microsoft certificates and maintained a clean record.  The Board also noted your contentions that you have medical issues that resulted from serving in the Navy and you are not able to obtain a government job with an OTH discharge.  In this regard, the Board concluded that your repeated misconduct outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge.  
 
In regard to your contention that you were told that your discharge would automatically be upgraded after six months, the Board noted that there is no provision in law or regulations that allows for re-characterization of a discharge automatically after six months, due solely to the passage of time.  In regard to your contentions that you were young, immature, did not know how to address your problems, and it was your first time being away from home, the Board noted that your record reflected repeated misconduct and the evidence of record did not show that you were not responsible for your conduct or that you should not be held accountable for your actions.  In regard to your contentions that you have been married for 26 years with kids and grandkids, participated in charity events, a church member, employed in the IT field for over 20 years, have Microsoft certificates and maintained a clean record. The Board noted while commendable, your post service conduct does not excuse your conduct while enlisted in the Navy or the basis for your discharge.  Regarding your contention that you are not able to obtain a Government job, whether or not you are eligible for employment with a Government agency is a matter under the cognizance of the agency, and you should contact the that agency concerning your right to apply for employment.  If you have been denied employment, you should appeal that denial under procedures established by the agency. 
    
The Board also noted that the record shows that you were notified of and waived your right to present your case to an administrative board (ADB).  In doing so, you gave up your first and best opportunity to advocate for retention or a more favorable characterization of service.  Regarding your contentions that you have medical issues that resulted from serving in the Navy, the board noted whether or not you are eligible for benefits is a matter under the cognizance of the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), and you should contact the nearest office of the DVA concerning your right to apply for benefits.  Regarding your contentions that you need DVA assistance in order to talk to someone, 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 may appeal that denial under procedures established by the DVA.   
 
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,