Docket No: 7271-19 
3291-01 
Ref: Signature Date           
 

Dear : 
 
This letter is in reference to your reconsideration request dated 18 June 2018.  You previously petitioned the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) and were advised that your application had been disapproved.  Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Sec’y of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004).  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 
 
Because your application was submitted with a new statement that was not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your most recent application.  In this regard, your current request was carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, on 9 March 2020.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, available portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.   
 
You request the Board upgrade your discharge to honorable.  You assert that your doctors suggested that you try to get help from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) for your medical conditions, including a ruptured disc, spinal misalignment, and pinched nerves.  You stated that you would have worked on upgrading your discharge sooner, but were told by DVA there was that you stood no change.   
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and contentions.  Although your application contained matters not previously considered by the Board, the Board concluded that these factors were insufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in three NJPs and a SPCM conviction.  Further, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of time.  Under the totality of the circumstances, the Board, in its review, determined that there was no probable material error or injustice in the discharge. 
 
It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable action cannot be taken.  You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence.  New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board.  In the absence of sufficient new and material evidence for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 
 
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.