Docket No: 3556-21 

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 4 December 1952.  On 26 August 1953, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for dereliction in the performance of your duties.  On 1 January 1954, you absented yourself from your unit for a period of about fourteen (14) hours, and subsequently received NJP for being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status.  On 28 June 1954, you were convicted at a Summary Court-Martial (SCM) for wrongfully and without proper authority wearing the incorrect rating badge.  You were sentenced to restriction for three (3) days.  On 8 October 1954, you were convicted at a Special Court-Martial (SPCM) for wrongfully sleeping on post.  You were sentenced to restriction for sixty (60) days.  On 7 May 1955, you were in a UA status for a period of two (2) days, and subsequently convicted at a SCM.  You were sentenced to forfeitures of $35.00 and restriction for twenty-two (22) days.  On 22 August 1955, you were in a UA status for a period of about twenty-two (22) hours, and subsequently received NJP.  On 11 June 1956, you were released from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Naval Reserves, at which time, you were not recommended for reenlistment due to low average trait markings.  After fulfilling your service obligation, you were discharged on 3 December 1960 with a general, under honorable conditions (GEN), characterization of service.   
 
The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contention that you never received your honorable discharge.  The Board noted that you were discharged as a result of your fulfillment of service obligation with a GEN characterization of service and not an honorable discharge.  The Board further noted your final overall trait averages and determined the type of characterization you received at discharge was appropriate.  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 desire to upgrade your characterization of service based on your contention above.  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