DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON. VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 4306-18 Ref: Signature date 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 the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was 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 27 June 2019. The names and votes of the members of the panel 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 this 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, policies, and a 10 May 2019 advisory opinion (AO). You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 25 June 1999. You served without disciplinary incident until 30 November 2000 when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for being absent for your physical fitness test. You received a second NJP on 8 March 2001 for an unauthorized absence (UA) from morning muster, wrongfully wearing a body piercing on base, and being incapacitated for duty due to prior overindulgence in alcohol. You received a third NJP for three instances of failing to go to your appointed place of duty. You received a fourth NJP for three instances of UA from battalion muster and being incapacitated for duty. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, drug abuse and alcohol rehabilitation failure. After you waived your procedural rights, your commanding officer recommended that you be discharged with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed that you be discharged by reason of misconduct with an OTH characterization of service. On 24 June 2002, you were discharged. Your request for an upgrade to your characterization of service was reviewed in consideration of your contention that you incurred intense anxiety while deployed to Guam. Your request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense's 3 September 2014 memorandum, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requested by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder,” of the 25 August 2017 memorandum “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual Harassment,” and the 25 July 2018 memorandum, “Guidance to Military Discharge Review boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations.” As part of the Board’s review process, a qualified mental health professional reviewed your request and provided the Board with an AO on 10 May 2019. The AO, noting you did not submit any medical records regarding a mental health condition, determined there was insufficient information to attribute your misconduct to a mental health condition. The mental health professional stated that mental health records must be submitted to render an opinion about whether your misconduct could be attributed to a mental health conditions. The AO was sent to you on 14 May 2019, and you were given 30 days in which to submit a response. When you did not provide a response, your case was submitted to the Board for consideration. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, your contention you were suffering from intense anxiety at the time of your misconduct, and your contention that you were wrongfully accused of a crime. Specifically, the Board considered your contention that the marijuana and paraphernalia were not yours and that your command ignored your statement that it was not, and also your roommate’s statement, that the marijuana and paraphernalia belonged to him. The Board also considered your contention that, to your knowledge, there was no investigation of the incident. Your service record, however, contains a voluntary statement by you to an investigating officer on 14 June 2002. In it, you admitted the marijuana was yours and provided specific details regarding the inspection that uncovered it and the means by which you obtained the illegal substance. Additionally, in your statement, you admitted to regular use of marijuana during your enlistment. The Board also considered your contention that you did not receive treatment, counseling, or support for your alcohol use and that to the best of your knowledge, treatment and counseling were not recommended. Your statement to investigators, however, states that you had been “screened by DAPA” and found to not be alcohol dependent. You further stated you had “attended CAAC Level II and IMPACT.” The Board, therefore, concluded there was insufficient evidence to support your contentions or warrant relief in your case. Unfortunately, even applying the liberal consideration standard, the Board found your drug-related misconduct did not warrant upgrading your discharge. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at this time. 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.