Docket No: 7775-19 
Date: Ref Signature 


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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 11 May 1981.  On 24 September 1982, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful appropriation.  On the same day, you were counseled regarding your misconduct and notified that further deficiencies may result in the initiation of administrative separation proceedings.  On 19 November 1983, you received NJP for marijuana use.  On 1 December 1983, you received NJP for unauthorized absence (UA).  On 2 December 1983, you were counseled regarding your misconduct and again notified that further deficiencies may result in the initiation of administrative separation proceedings.  On 6 February 1984, you were counseled regarding your marijuana use and again notified that further misconduct may result in the initiation of administrative separation proceedings.  You went on a period of UA from 13 March 1984, until your surrender on 17 May 1984.  You went on a second period of UA from 23 May 1984, until your apprehension by civil authorities on 7 July 1986.  On 7 August 1986, you were convicted at a general court martial for UA, however your charges were later dismissed by the military judge after your defense counsel raised an issue regarding the statute of limitations for the offense for which you were convicted.  On 29 August 1986, you were notified of the initiation of administrative separation proceedings by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  On 3 September 1986, you elected to assert your right to consult with counsel, and after consulting with counsel, you waived your right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board.  On 5 September 1986, your commanding officer recommended your discharge from naval service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct due to a commission of a serious offense.  On 22 October 1986, the discharge authority approved and directed your discharge from naval service.  On 28 October 1986, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and assertion of youth and family problems.  You contend, you intended to return to complete your duties, and your counsel informed you that your characterization would be upgraded if you had no trouble in the civilian world.  After careful consideration of your contentions, the Board did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants upgrading your characterization of service.  With regard to your contention that your characterization would be upgraded if you had no trouble in the civilian world, the Board advises that a characterization of service is not automatically upgraded solely based on an individual’s good behavior after 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 the 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,