Docket No: 3730-20 Ref: Signature Date Dear : 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 the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application was denied. Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it to be 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 21 September 2020. 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. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 22 April 1988. Prior to coming on to active duty, you signed the Navy Drug and Alcohol Statement of Understanding on 7 April 1988, and were briefed on the Navy’s policy on Drug and Alcohol Abuse on 22 April 1988. On 7 September 1990, you were referred for a competency for duty examination after reporting to work with alcohol on your breath. On 29 September 1990, you were arrested for driving while intoxicated after you were involved in a vehicular accident with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .156 and a fellow Sailor in the vehicle you were driving. On 10 October 1990, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for this drunk driving incident and for making a false official statement in violation of Article 107, Uniform Code of Military Justice. Despite this incident and your NJP, your command elected not to separate you from the Navy, and on 21 October 1990 referred you to Level I alcohol treatment while warning you that further alcohol incidents could result in your administrative separation. After subsequently being elevated to Level II treatment, you were deemed to be a treatment failure on 11 October 1991 after falling asleep in lectures. In November 1991, you were twice referred for competency for duty examinations when alcohol was again detected on your breath while on duty. On 26 November 1991, you refused to accept Level III alcohol rehabilitation treatment. By memorandum dated 2 December 1991, you were notified that you were being considered for administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to your commission of a serious offense and alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure. On 4 December 1991, you waived your right to counsel and to a hearing before an administrative separation board. On 18 December 1991, the separation authority directed your administrative separation under other than honorable (OTH) conditions. On 2 January 1992, you were discharged with a characterization of under OTH conditions. The Naval Discharge Review Board considered your request to upgrade the characterization of your discharge to honorable on 9 April 1996, and determined that relief was not appropriate. You have requested that the Board upgrade your discharge to general (under honorable conditions) or to honorable. In support of your request, you acknowledged and expressed your regret that your time in the Navy was hampered by extreme alcohol abuse that you did not appreciate at the time and which you were not able to overcome until you became a member of your church. You also noted that since your discharge you have been married for 25 years, raised three children currently in college, owned a business for 10 years, served as Field Engineer, earned a Bachelor’s degree in Management Information Systems, and became an author. You also made the Board aware that you continue to work as a contractor for the After careful and deliberate consideration, the Board found no error or injustice in your discharge from the Navy under OTH conditions. Specifically, the Board found that your alcohol related misconduct, particularly your drunk driving charge with a very high BAC which endangered a fellow Sailor, along with your alcohol rehabilitation failure and refusal to accept Level III alcohol rehabilitation treatment, warranted an OTH discharge. It also found that no error or injustice in the processing of your discharge under OTH conditions, noting that you waived your right to present your case to an administrative separation board. Accordingly, the Board found no error or injustice in the initial assignment of an OTH discharge in your case. In addition to reviewing the circumstances of your OTH discharge for error or injustice, the Board also considered your application in light of recent DoD guidance1 to determine whether equitable relief is appropriate in your case. In this regard, the Board considered, among other factors, the regret that you expressed for your alcohol addiction and acceptance of responsibility for your actions, your post-service efforts to rehabilitate yourself, your post-service professional and educational accomplishments and contributions to society, and the passage of time since your discharge. While the Board acknowledged your impressive post-service accomplishments and rehabilitation efforts, it did not find a sufficient basis to upgrade your discharge at this time. 1 See USD Memo, “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military / Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations,” 25 Jul 2018. In this regard, it is important to note that you only provided the Board with your own statement, a copy of your diploma, and a concealed carry permit for consideration. While the Board does not doubt your word, it had no evidence of the type or quality of your work, or of your reputation in the community. While the Board makes no promise that such evidence would make a difference, it does encourage you to request reconsideration per the instructions below with additional material that it can rely upon to determine whether equitable relief is appropriate.2 2 Such materials may include, but are not limited to, character statements from appropriate individuals, work evaluations by your employer(s), evidence of volunteer activities (if any), and descriptions of your writings as an author. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. 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 correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. Sincerely,