Docket No: 9419-19 /2548-12 
Ref: Signature Date           
  
Dear  
 
This letter is in reference to your reconsideration request dated 13 September 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. 
 
Although you did not file your application 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 20 July 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 and began a period of active duty on 10 July 1990.  On 22 September 1991, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that continued until 25 September 1991.  You began another period of UA again on 9 November 1991,that terminated on 24 February 1992.  On 18 March 1992, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) for the aforementioned period of UA.  On 16 April 1992, 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 elected to submit a statement.  You claimed that while you were at home on pre-deployment leave you learned your mother had cancer, therefore, you decided to go UA. Your commanding officer recommended that you receive an under other than honorable (OTH) conditions discharge.  On 4 June 1992, during your separation physical you indicated that “I am in good health and currently am not taking any medications.”  Your record indicates that while on active duty you had experienced ear/nose/throat issues, leg cramps, a tumor or growth, and back pain.  The discharge authority directed an OTH character of service and on 21 July 1992, you were discharged. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service, post-service accomplishments, and contentions that you were not properly discharged, were threatened to either waive your rights or be charged with desertion and face many years in prison, and that you did not receive proper medical care while in service.  The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge.  With respect to your contention that you were threatened to accept administrative separation or be charged with desertion, the Board noted that you were not notified of administrative separation until after your court-martial conviction for UA, and that you did invoke your right to submit a statement to the separation authority.  In regards to your contention that you were not given proper medical treatment, the Board noted your chronological record of medical care indicates treatment for various issues on several occasions.  Further, the Board did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants granting clemency in the form of an upgraded characterization of service. 
   
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. 
 
Sincerely,