Docket No: 2780-21        

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 the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was 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 27 September 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 commenced a period of active duty on 24 June 1992.  On 29 June 1995, you were convicted by a summary court-martial for making a false official statement and stealing government property.  On 9 July 1995, you were notified of the initiation of administrative separation processing due to commission of a serious offense and your rights in connection therewith.  You waived your right to an administrative board.  On 16 July 1995, your commanding officer recommended that you be discharged with an other than honorable characterization of service.  On 3 August 1995, the discharge authority directed that you be 
discharged with an other than honorable characterization of service, and, according to the best available copy of your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), you were so discharged on or about 10 August 1995. 
 
In 2008, you filed an application with the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) contending that since the incident that led to your discharge from the Navy, you had been a well-rounded citizen, a great employee, as well as a good student who is pursuing a Bachelor’s of Science Degree in accounting.  On 7 February 2008, the NDRB determined that your discharge was appropriately characterized and that the evidence of post-service conduct did not mitigate the conduct that led to your discharge. 
 
The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors in your petition to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case including in accordance with the Wilkie Memo.  You present in your petition matters in clemency and mitigation of your conduct that led to your discharge.  Specifically, you state that in the 25 years since your discharge you dedicated your life to working smart and paying attention, you were divorced and took on the role of a single father, and you did so without incident all while working and going to college full time.  You worked during the day and went to college at night and within 4 years, you received your Bachelor of Science degree in Accounting.  You continued to parent your daughter and eventually you attained a Master’s in Business Administration degree.  You state that during this time you made great strides professional at different beverage companies and later assisted your mother in taking care of your ill father.  Eventually, you became an accountant for your home state and now you are in a chief of finance role for your home state’s Department of Education. 
 
Based upon its review, the Board concluded the potentially mitigating factors that you raised were insufficient to warrant relief.  The Board carefully reviewed your statement and supporting materials that you provided, including your letters of reference.  The Board commended you for your effort and the success that you have attained.  However, the Board determined that the misconduct that you engaged in while you were on active duty, larceny of ammunition rounds from your ship and making a false statement concerning them, supported your characterization of service, and that your post-service conduct and achievements, though notable, did not outweigh the misconduct that supported your discharge characterization.  Given the totality of the circumstances, and in light of your misconduct as evidenced by your summary court-martial conviction, 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, 
								10/7/2021
								Executive Director