Docket No: 5956-20
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 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 16 December 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, 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 enlisted in the Navy on 13 April 1981.  On 19 January 1982, you received non-judicial punishment for absence from your appointed place of duty and missing ship’s movement.  On 7 May 1982, you were placed on the urinalysis surveillance program from June to July 1982.  Your record does not contain all of the documentation pertaining to your separation from the Navy.  Absent such evidence, the Board relied on a presumption of regularity and presumed that at some point during your enlistment, you illegally used a controlled substance, and were eventually notified of administrative discharge action by reason misconduct due to drug abuse.  Presumably, after you waived your procedural rights, your commanding officer forwarded your package to the separation authority recommending your separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, with a general under honorable conditions characterization of service.  The separation authority approved this recommendation, and you were so discharged on 13 September 1982.   
 
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 contentions that you were told your discharge would be upgraded to honorable, your positive urinalysis was the result of someone changing your specimen for a friend’s specimen, and that you received a letter stating your punishment was reversed excluding your reenlistment code.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contentions, and determined that your misconduct due to drug abuse, outweighed these mitigating factors.  The Board also noted there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for automatic re-characterization of service.  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 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,