Docket No: 9127-19 Ref: Signature Date 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 for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You enlisted in the Navy on 18 February 1976. During the period from 16 July 1976 to 19 September 1977, you received five non-judicial punishment (NJP) for six specifications of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 16 days, two specifications of assault, wrongful possession of hashish, dereliction of duty, missing ship’s movement, disrespectful in language toward a petty officer, and breaking restriction. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement. After you waived your rights, your commanding officer (CO) recommended a general under honorable conditions discharge (GEN) by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement. The discharge authority approved your CO’s recommendation and directed a general discharge due to misconduct. On 7 November 1977, you went into a UA status for an unidentified amount of time. On 16 November 1977, you were discharged with a GEN character of service. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge, contentions that you were young, never offered counseling, never got a chance to improve or enhance his abilities, and told you would go to “A” school, which never happened. The Board also noted your contention that since discharge, you served your country on military sealift command ships. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case given your misconduct and final marks received at discharge. The Board noted that character of service is based, in part, on conduct and overall trait averages which are computed from marks assigned during periodic evaluations. Your conduct average was 2.4. An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for an honorable characterization of service. In regard to the contention that you were young when discharged, the Board noted that your record clearly reflected your misconduct and the evidence of record did not show that you were not responsible for your conduct or that you should not be held accountable for your actions. In regard to your contentions that you were never offered counseling and were never given a chance to improve or enhance your abilities, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to your contention. As detailed in your record, you received warning counselling prior to receiving each NJP in your record, which you acknowledged, by signing the counseling. The Board also noted that, as detailed in your record, the record shows that you were notified of, and waived your right to present your case to an administrative board (ADB). In doing so, you gave up your first and best opportunity to advocate for retention or a more favorable characterization of service. In regard to your contention that you were told you would go to “A” school, which never happened, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support this contention. Regarding your contention that since discharge you served your country on military sealift command ships, the Board noted that while commendable, your post service conduct did not support an upgrade to the characterization of your 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 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, Microsoft Office Signature Line...