Docket No: 4458-21
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 4 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). 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 4 April 1988.  On 14 July 1988, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to your appointed place of duty, leaving your place of duty while in a duty status, and underage drinking.  On 27 June 1990, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of attempted assault, wrongfully using provoking words, and wrongfully communicating a threat. 
 
On 2 July 1990, you were notified that you were being recommended for administrative discharge from the Navy because of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  You were advised of, and waived, your procedural rights, including your right to consult with and be represented by military counsel, and your right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).  Your commanding officer (CO) then forwarded your administrative separation package to the separation authority (SA) recommending administrative discharge from the Navy with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. The SA approved the CO’s recommendation and directed your OTH discharge from the Navy by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  On 13 July 1990, you were so 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 desire to upgrade your discharge, and your contention that you entered the Navy at the age of 17 under the assumption it would be a place to develop self-control and personal accountability.  After transferring from the highly regimented discipline of the Navy’s basic training, and subsequent assignment to your permanent duty station, you were exposed to a level of freedom that you never had before.  You further assert that due to your immaturity, you were easily seduced by the most undesirable aspects of the military, and that although it does not negate your errors, you ask that it be considered in context.  Additionally, you assert that you have made successful efforts to become a law abiding, productive, and engaged member of society.  
 
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 an NJP and SCM conviction, outweighed these mitigating factors.  The Board discerned no impropriety or inequity in the discharge.  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, 


8/28/2021
Executive Director