Docket No: 2692-21
Ref: Signature Date 

Dear Petitioner: 
 
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 7 May 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). 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 19 July 1993.  On 7 November 1994, you were counseled for failure to pay just debts or incurring debts.  You were advised that failure to take corrective action may result in disciplinary action or receiving an other than honorable (OTH) discharge.  On 9 January 1995, you were counseled for a returned check in the amount of $282.11.  On 6 March 1995, you were counseled for indebtedness to the Navy Exchange, at which point, you were ordered to set up an appointment with the command financial counselor.  On 9 March 1995, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order by missing mandatory physical readiness training, and failure to report to your prescribed place of duty.  On the same date, you were counseled for failure to maintain financial responsibilities.  You were advised that failure to take corrective action may result in administrative separation.  On 25 April 1995, you were arrested by civilian authorities for driving with a suspended license and failure to appear in court.  On 16 August 1995, you were again arrested by civilian authorities for failing to appear in court, speeding, and driving with a suspended license.  On 26 January 1996, the  Court issued a court citation against you for “failing to appear on suspended license.”  On 12 February 1996, you received a second NJP for dishonorably failing to pay debt.  On 23 February 1996, you were convicted by a civilian court for driving with a suspended license, resulting from the aforementioned 25 April 1995 arrest.  On 28 February 1996, you were notified of the initiation of separation proceedings by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  On 12 March 1996, you were convicted by civil court and charged with driving with a suspended license, failure to appear in court, and speeding, resulting from the aforementioned 16 August 1995 arrest.   
 
On 28 February 1996, you were notified of proposed administrative separation processing by reason of misconduct due to a commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  On 25 March 1996, you consulted with counsel and elected an administrative discharge board (ADB).  Prior to your commanding officer (CO) forwarding your case to the discharge authority, you waived your ADB.  Subsequently, your CO recommended an OTH discharge by reason misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  On 29 April 1996, the discharge authority approved the recommendation and ordered an OTH discharge by reason of pattern of misconduct.  On 10 May 1996, you were discharged. 
  
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 contention that you got married and were living in an abusive relationship.  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 repeated misconduct, as evidenced by your NJPs, 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, 
  
7/12/21

Executive Director