DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 5058-21 Ref: Signature Date 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 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. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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, 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 U.S. Navy and began a period of active duty on 3 June 1990. On 26 August 1991, you absented yourself from your unit until you surrendered to the Personnel Support Detachment, ,on 23 September 1991. You were transferred to your parent command on 24 September 1991. On 1 October 1991, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status and missing a ship’s movement. You subsequently received a counseling entry and were advised that further violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) or conduct could result in an administrative separation under other than honorable (OTH) conditions. On 6 April 1992, you were again in a UA status until you surrendered on 4 May 1992. On 14 May 1992, you received NJP for being UA and received a counseling entry. You were advised that further violations of the UCMJ or conduct could result in administrative separation under OTH conditions. On 11 July 1992, you received NJP for willful disobedience towards a petty officer, disrespect towards a petty officer and communicating a threat. On 17 July 1992, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct, specifically, commission of a serious offense (COSO) and/or pattern of misconduct (POM), at which time, you elected not to consult with counsel and waived your procedural rights to an administrative discharge board. On 7 August 1992, the discharge authority directed your discharge with an OTH characterization of service by reason of misconduct, specifically, POM. On 12 August 1992, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service. The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contention that you feel you were wrongly persecuted by your command after you were written up for a sunburn even though you received sunblock from the medical officer. The Board noted your record did not contain a counseling entry nor did you receive disciplinary action in support of your contention. 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 noted you did not provide any post-advocacy documents or character statements for clemency consideration. Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief. Specifically, the Board determined that your 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, 9/13/2021 Executive Director