Docket No: 0265-21 
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 3 February 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). 
 
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 Navy and began a period of active duty on 15 July 1992.  You subsequently completed this enlistment with an honorable characterization of service on 17 April 1996, and reenlisted on 18 April 1996.  On 15 October 1999, you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of fleeing apprehension, rape, aggravated assault with means likely to produce grievous bodily harm, aggravated assault with a dangerous weapon and burglary with intent to commit rape.  Although, the specifics of your awarded punishment were not reflected in the record, on 25 September 2007, you were discharged with a bad conduct discharge (BCD).  
 
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 contentions that (1) your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) incorrectly states dishonorable discharge; (2) since your release from the Navy, you have been a model citizen; (3) you have graduated from phlebotomy school, and while you are not employed due to a work injury, you have remained out of trouble for 15 plus years.  The Board noted you did not submit any documentation or advocacy letters to be considered in support of your petition.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that your misconduct, as evidenced by your GCM conviction that resulted in a BCD, outweighed these mitigating factors.  About your contention concerning your character of service, the Board noted your DD Form 214 reflects your character of service as bad conduct discharge.  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 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, 
  
2/18/2021
Executive Director