Docket No: 3181-21 

 
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 21 June 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 U.S. Navy on 14 September 1965.  On 4 May 1966, you were convicted at a Special Court-Martial for conspiring and stealing property from the U.S. Naval Submarine Base Exchange, located aboard , of a total of $28.19.  You were sentenced to reduction to E-1, confinement with hard labor for two (2) months, and forfeitures of $60.00 pay per month for two (2) months.  You were subsequently placed into confinement until you were released on 24 June 1966.  While confined, you submitted a request to serve with your brother aboard .  Your record is incomplete in that it does not provide additional information as to whether your request was approved by your command.   
 
On 4 January 1967, you were arrested by the San Diego U.S. Navy Shore Patrol for being under the influence of alcohol; You were subsequently returned to your command.  On 2 February 1967, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for failing to report to the crew’s galley and failing to obey a lawful order from a Petty Officer.  On 7 April 1967, you were discharged by 
reason of convenience of the government due to your subpar professional performance and military behavior with a general, (under honorable conditions) characterization of service.  Further, you were not recommended for reenlistment. 
 
The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contention that due to regulations, you and your brother were on the same ship so you had to be discharged based on the “Sullivan Act.”  The Board noted that you were discharged as a result of convenience of the government as referenced on your DD214 and a page 13 entry in your service record dated 7 April 1967 (enclosed).  Additionally, you acknowledged the entry informing you that you were not being recommended for reenlistment, the reasoning for separation, and the separation authority.  The Board further noted that your service record makes no mention of the “Sullivan Act” as the reason for your discharge.  The Board concluded there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice that warrants granting clemency in the form of an upgraded characterization of service.   
 
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 above, and your desire to upgrade your characterization of service based on your desire to get a loan and insurance through USAA.  The Board further noted 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, 
									      7/5/2021
									      Executive Director