Dear   
 
This letter is in reference to your reconsideration request dated 25 July 2019.  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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.  
 
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 November 2019.  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.   
 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a change to your narrative reason for separation to disability.  You assert that you were unfit for continued naval service due to a kidney condition that should have resulted in a disability discharge.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  First, the Board noted that you underwent treatment for a kidney issue in April 1969.  However, your records show that you were cleared for full duty by a medical board in June 1969.  Based on this evidence, the Board found the preponderance of the evidence did not support a finding that you were unfit for continued naval service at the time of your discharge.  Second, the Board found that you committed two offenses of unauthorized absence and broke restriction after your non-judicial punishment in June 1970.  You subsequently submitted a request to be discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial and were administratively separated for your misconduct.  The Board determined your administrative separation for misconduct made you ineligible for disability processing even if there was evidence of unfitness at the time of your discharge.  Third, despite your assertion that you currently suffer from medical conditions that you feel are service connected, the Board felt this was insufficient mitigation evidence to change your narrative reason for separation.  In their opinion, your narrative reason for separation and characterization 
of service is supported by the preponderance of the evidence and does not merit an upgrade or change due to your history of misconduct while on active duty.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. 
 
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 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 the absence of new matters 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.