Docket No. 7268-19 
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 28 January 1980.  On 25 March 1982, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unlawful possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia.  On 8 April 1982, you were advised that further discrepancies in performance or conduct could result in administrative separation and/or judicial proceedings.  On 9 April 1982, you received NJP for 16 instances of unauthorized absence (UA) from your appointed place of duty.  On 3 May 1983, you received NJP for 15 instances of being UA from your appointed place of duty.  On 1 August 1982, you received NJP for UA from 28 June until 2 July 1982.   On 11 August 1982, an entry was placed in your record, that you refused to sign, warning you about the potential for administrative separation.  On 8 October 1982, you received NJP for three instances of UA from your appointed place of duty.  Another entry was placed in your record, that you refused to sign, warning you about the potential for administrative separation.  On 17 December 1982, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) for UA and disobedience of a lawful order.  Subsequently, on 27 December 1982, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  After being afforded all of your procedural rights, you waived them, and your case was forwarded to the separation authority for review.  Your commanding officer recommended that you receive an under other than honorable conditions (OTH) discharge.   On 14 February 1983, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and your contentions that the Navy failed to treat your headaches properly and that you were a good Sailor for three years.  The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge.  In regards to your contentions, based on a 23 September 1982 letter from the ship’s Senior Medical Officer (SMO) to your commanding officer, you were seen at sick call 56 times in 24 months.  The SMO further indicated that medication that had been prescribed, an otolaryngolist (ENT) consultation, three neurology consultations, and a Computerized Axial Tomography test performed at a civilian hospital were conducted and all tests and consultations with specialists determined you had no demonstrable diseases of sinuses, no brain lesions or tumors, and that your headaches were tension related or possibly migraines.  The SMO further informed your CO that you insisted your headaches would not resolve unless you were given shore duty or medically discharged.  The Board determined there was no nexus to your misconduct that included 5 NJPs, SCM, and two warning about the possibility of an administrative separation and your headaches.   
 
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,