DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 5164-20 Ref: Signature Date 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 2 December 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, 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 reenlisted in the Navy, after over five years of honorable service, on 28 May 1986. On 16 June 1986, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use of amphetamines. On 24 July 1986, a drug and alcohol abuse report notes you completed treatment for alcohol abuse during your first enlistment in April 1979 and December 1985, and you were subsequently recommended for retention, however further misconduct would result in an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. On 10 October 1986 and 3 November 1986 you received letters of substandard service. On 6 February 1987, you received NJP for UA and writing checks with insufficient funds. On 11 February 1987, you were notified of the initiation of administrative separation proceedings by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense, and misconduct-drug abuse, at which point, you waived your right to consult with counsel, and review of your case by an administrative discharge board. On 16 March 1987, the discharge authority approved and directed your discharge. On 24 March 1987, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense. 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 contention that you were not thinking clearly due to your wife leaving and taking your children. Additionally, you request eligibility for health care from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) and HUD housing. 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 your two NJPs, outweighed these mitigating factors. Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief. The Board also noted that as a result of your prior honorable service, you may be eligible for veteran's benefits. You may contact the nearest office of the DVA if you desire clarification regarding your eligibility for those benefits. 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, 1/28/2021 Executive Director