Docket No: 1285-21 
Ref: Signature Date 
                
Dear  
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted 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 31 March 2021.  The names and votes of the panel members 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 the 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, to include the 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). 
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 7 January 1999.  According to the information in the record.  On 29 April 1999, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for underage drinking.  On 27 July 1999, you went into an unauthorized absence status.  On 17 February 2000, civil authorities charged you with Armed Robbery.  On 23 February 2000, you were returned to military control.  At an unidentified time, you submitted a written request for discharge for a good of the service (GOS) discharge due to being in a UA status for 206 days.  Although the Board lacked your entire service record, the Board relied on a presumption of regularity that prior to submitting this request, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, at which time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.  Your request was granted and your commanding officer (CO) was directed to issue an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service.  As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction, as well as the potential penalties of such a punitive discharge.  On 28 March 2000, you were discharged.   
 
As stated previously, the Board relies on a presumption of regularity to support the official actions of public officials and, in the absence of substantial evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Petitioner, the Board presume that you were properly discharged from the Navy. 
 
The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case in accordance with the Wilkie Memo.  These included, but were not limited to, your desire to upgrade your discharge, and your contentions that your recruiter told you that you would have shore duty after Boot Camp, you took friends to  and were charged with Armed Robbery because you were driving.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that your misconduct, lack of supporting documents, and request for a GOS discharge outweighed these mitigating factors.  Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief. 
 
In regard to your contention that your recruiter told you that you would have shore duty after Boot Camp, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention.  Regarding your contention that you took friends to and 
were charged with Armed Robbery because you were driving, the Board noted that the documents you provided show you were charged, convicted, and sentenced to seven years in the  Department of Corrections for Armed Robbery.   
    
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, 
4/16/2021
Executive Director