DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 1770-18/1466-11   
Ref: Signature date 


This letter is in reference to your 27 February 2018 request for reconsideration of the Board for Correction of Naval Records’ (Board) denial of your previous application (Docket No. 1466-11).  You previously petitioned the Board and were advised in our letter of 19 April 2011 that your application had been denied.  Your request for reconsideration was reviewed in accordance with Board procedures that conform to Lipsman v.  Secretary of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C.  2004).  After careful and conscientious reconsideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 

Because your application was submitted with evidence that was not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your most recent application.  In this regard, your current request was carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, on 28 March 2019.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, available portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 23 August 2001.  On 25 October 2002, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a 56-day unauthorized absence (UA), desertion, and wrongful use of marijuana.  Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, and advised of your administrative rights.  After you waived your rights, your commanding officer recommended that you be separated from the naval service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  The discharge authority approved this recommendation, and directed that you be discharged by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse with an OTH characterization of service. On 12 December 2002, you were so discharged. 

The previous Board considered your request for an upgrade to your characterization of service. Your current application requests reconsideration and again seeks an upgrade to your discharge characterization based on clemency.  You contend, in part, that you have grown into a productive, as well as successful, adult.  You further contend that your spiritual path has led you to become an ordained minister and mentor to at-risk youth.  The Board considered your request for a second chance, your statement, and your advocacy letters.  The Board noted that at your NJP, you contended you went absent without permission because you did not believe your chain of command would let you go home and help your daughter.  The Board also noted the record does not explain, nor did you submit any evidence explaining, what difficulties you were experiencing with your family at the time of your UA, or evidence demonstrating the reason for your belief that the chain of command would not support you.  Accordingly, under the totality of the circumstances, the Board in its review discerned no probable material error or injustice in the discharge. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable action cannot be taken again.  You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters.  New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board.  In the absence of sufficient new matters for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 

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, 



6/28/2019