Docket No: 8008-19 
Ref: Signature Date 


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 14 April 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 22 June 1987.  On 3 August 1987, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for larceny and were awarded forfeiture of pay.  You were counseled that further discrepancies in performance or conduct could result in administrative separation or judicial proceedings.  On 3 December 1987, you received a second NJP for unauthorized absence (UA) and failure to obey lawful orders.  You were awarded forfeiture of pay, restriction, and extra duties.  On 4 December 1987, you were again warned about the potential for administrative separation.  On 17 December 1987, you received a third NJP for UA and disrespect and were awarded a verbal reprimand.  On 18 December 1987, administrative discharge action was initiated 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 be discharged with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  The separation authority approved and directed your discharge from the Navy.  You were discharged on 3 February 1988.  On 19 December 1991, the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) notified you of their decision regarding your request for an upgraded discharge.  The NDRB determined your discharge was proper and equitable, and that no relief was warranted. 

You request the Board upgrade your discharge to general (under honorable conditions).  You assert the OTH discharge was extremely harsh for the infractions you committed.  Additionally, you claim you were treated unfairly because of racial prejudice.  You state:  “I became suspect because I was new, I had some baggage and for the record, I was black.” Lastly, you claim you were told that six months after your discharge the OTH would automatically upgrade to general. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and contentions and concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in three NJPs within six months of entering active duty, two of which occurred after you were warned about the potential for administrative separation.  The Board noted that you provided no evidence to support your contentions.  Absent such evidence, the Board relied upon the presumption of regularity and presumed that the officials acted in accordance with governing law/policy and in good faith.  Further, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for an automatic upgrade in the characterization of service solely due to the passage of time. 

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.