DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 4360-21 Ref: Signature Date Dear Petitioner: 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 11 August 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 24 August 1988. On 14 December 1989 and 30 May 1990, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP). Your offenses were an unauthorized absence, dereliction of duty, failure to obey a lawful order and willful disobedience of a noncommissioned officer. On 8 November 1990, you were psychologically evaluated and subsequently diagnosed with an adjustment disorder and personality disorder. On 19 February 1991, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of communicating a threat. On 18 April 1991, you were notified that you were being recommended for administrative discharge from the Navy. You were advised of, and elected, your procedural right to consult with and to be represented by military counsel, and your right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). An ADB was convened and recommended that you be retained in the naval service. Your commanding officer (CO) then forwarded your administrative separation package to the separation authority (SA) concurring with the ADB’s recommendation. The SA approved the recommendation, and you were retained in the naval service. On 30 October 1992, you received your third NJP; the specifics of your charges and specifications are not in the record. The record also reflects that you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM). Unfortunately, your official military personnel file is incomplete in that it does not contain all the documents pertaining to your SPCM. In this regard, the Board relies on a presumption of regularity to support the official actions of public officers and, in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary (as is the case at present), will presume that they have properly discharged their official duties. Based on your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), on 5 October 1994 you received a bad conduct discharge (BCD), your narrative reason for separation is “Court-Martial Conviction,” your separation code is “JJD/901,” and your reenlistment code is “RE-4.” 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 your contention that you were considered to have directly disobeyed a lawful order that you never heard; you tried to fight this at the time but the Judge told you that "all that mattered was the order given, and was it followed," it didn't matter that you never heard the order. The Board noted you did not submit any documentation or advocacy letters to be considered by the board in support of your application. 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 three NJPs, a SCM and SPCM conviction and subsequent BCD, outweighed these mitigating factors. Additionally, the Board noted that you were given an opportunity to earn a better characterization of service when you were retained in the Navy, but failed to do so as evidenced by your continued misconduct. 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, 9/2/2021 Executive Director