Docket No: 1959-21 
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 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 26 April 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, 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). 
 
The Board determined that your personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You enlisted in the U.S. Navy and began a period of active duty on 7 November 1975.  From 7 July 1976 until 18 February 1977, you absented yourself from your unit on four different occasions, resulting in you receiving non-judicial punishment (NJP) four times.  On 3 September 1976, you received a counseling entry informing you that further conduct of discreditable nature may be grounds for administrative discharge.  Your second NJP held on 31 August1976 included a violation of a General Order, specifically, possession of marijuana.  On 17 February 1977, at your request, your command referred you for psychiatric screening due to the inability to cope with the military environment.  Although the medical consultation is a part of your record, your record is incomplete in that it does not provide evidence of subsequent evaluations conducted.  Nevertheless, on 1 March 1977, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct, specifically, frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities, at which point, you elected to waive your procedural rights.  Further, you were notified of the commanding officer’s intent to recommend to the discharge authority that you be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions (GEN), characterization of service.  On 10 March 1977, the discharge authority directed discharge with a GEN characterization of service by reason of misconduct.  On 18 March 1977, you were found to be physically qualified for separation by the same medical officer who conducted your previous consultation, and you were discharged with a GEN characterization of service.   
 
The Board carefully reviewed your application and 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 characterization of service to get a house and car through USAA Insurance, and your contentions that you do not remember getting court-martialed relating to your discharge, and that you requested separation due to mental anguish.  The Board noted your contentions; however, based on your service record, you were discharged from the U.S. Navy as a result of administrative separation due to repeated violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  The Board further noted that you did not submit advocacy letters or post-service documents to be considered for clemency purposes.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that your repeated misconduct outweighed these mitigating factors.  Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief.   
   
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, 

4/30/2021
Executive Director