DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
 
Docket No: 903-19          
Ref: Signature date 

This letter 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 that 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 January 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 on 17 October 1988.  On 24 January 1989, you submitted a written request for discharge for the good of the service (GOS) to avoid trial by special court-martial for unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 38 days and breaking restriction.  Prior to submitting this request, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, at which time you were advised of your rights, admitted your guilt, and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.  Your request was granted and your commanding officer (CO) was directed to discharge you with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service for the good of the service.  As a result, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction, as well as the potential penalties of such a punitive discharge.  On 7 February 1989, pursuant to your request, you were so discharged.  You subsequently petitioned the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) to upgrade your discharge characterization and, on 21 March 2002, the NDRB denied your petition. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge, contentions that you have worked hard to support your family and became a productive member of society, and that you need Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) benefits in order to receive assistance with your health issues.  However, the Board found that these factors were insufficient to warrant relief in your case, given your misconduct and request for a GOS discharge in order to avoid trial by special court-martial. 

Regarding your contention that you have worked hard to support your family and became a productive member of society the Board noted that, while commendable, your post-service conduct does not excuse your conduct while enlisted in the Navy or the basis for your discharge. 

Regarding your contention that you need DVA benefits in order to receive assistance with your health issues, the Board noted that whether or not you are eligible for DVA benefits to help with your health issues is a matter under the cognizance of the DVA, and you may contact the nearest office of the DVA concerning your right to apply for benefits.  If you have been denied benefits, you may appeal that denial under procedures established by the DVA. 

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, 


1/29/2020