DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 8012-19 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 10 March 1980. On 13 July 1981, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order and were awarded forfeiture of pay and extra duties. On 24 August 1981, you received a second NJP for unauthorized absence (UA), bringing a knife into the Enlisted Club, and assaulting a petty officer. You were awarded forfeiture of pay and extra duties and counseled that failure to take corrective action could result in administrative separation and judicial proceedings. On 28 December 1981, you were counseled regarding your derogatory performance evaluation. On 4 January 1982, you received a third NJP for UA and failure to obey a lawful order. You were awarded forfeiture of pay, extra duties, and reduction in rank. The forfeiture of pay and reduction were suspended for six months. On 7 December 1981, you wrote a letter to Commander, Navy Personnel Command via your chain of command. In the letter, you contest your recent performance evaluation. On 5 January 1982, your commanding officer forwarded your letter noting that you were argumentative, moody, and unpredictable, and that you lacked motivation, displayed poor workmanship, and had a quick temper. On 19 July 1985, you received a fourth NJP for UA, missing ship movement, and resisting arrest. You were awarded forfeiture of pay, restriction, and reduction in rank. The forfeiture of pay was suspended for 6 months. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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 under other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. On 28 July 1985, the separation authority concurred and directed your separation from the Navy. On 12 August 1985, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service. You request the Board upgrade your discharge. You assert: “this was a single isolated incident.” You state you want to be proud that you served and not embarrassed to prove it. In support of your petition, you attached a personal statement that included information about your childhood. You indicated that when you entered the Navy you had issues with authority and punctuality, but that you successfully completed four years of service. You claim that at the time of your UA and missing movement, your wife was planning to leave you for another man and to take everything. You attempted to be removed from your pending deployment, but your command did not help. Therefore, you missed movement and got divorced, but it ruined your career. Lastly, you state you have worked on Navy ships as a marine electrician for 34 years and have dedicated your life to the Navy. 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. The Board noted that your contention that you only had one incident in four years is not supported by the record, and according to your record, you had four NJPs. Additionally, the Board noted that, although a Sailor’s service is generally characterized at the time of discharge based on performance and conduct throughout the entire enlistment, the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident of misconduct may provide the basis of a member’s characterization of service. Generally, characterization under OTH conditions is warranted for misconduct. Further, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for an upgrade in the characterization of service solely due to the passage of time. The Board discerned no probable material error or injustice in your discharge that warrants an upgrade in the characterization of your service. 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, 5/1/2020