Docket No: 6404-20 
Ref: Signature date 
 
  
Dear  
 
This letter is in reference to your application for correction of the naval record of   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 with respect to your request to upgrade  characterization of service was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, the  application has been denied.     
 
Although you did not file the application in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider the application on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered the application on 23 September 2020.  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 the application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of the Petitioner’s naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
The Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 22 September 1981.  On 28 June 1983, he received nonjudicial punishment for unauthorized absence, disobeying a chief petty officer, and disobeying a lawful order.  On 8 August 1984, he was convicted by a summary court-martial for unauthorized absence.  On 11 April 1985, he received nonjudicial punishment for using cocaine.  He was notified that he was being processed for administrative separation, and he participated in an administrative board on 3 May 1985.  The administrative board found that he did commit misconduct by using cocaine, and that he should be discharged with an other than honorable characterization of service.  He was discharged on 24 July 1985 with an other than honorable characterization of service.  On 3 January 1986, he petitioned the Naval Discharge Review Board (NRDB), at which he asserted that his drug use was a one-time experimental use.  The NDRB denied his petition.  On 11 April 1991, he petitioned the NDRB again, at which he asserted that he had used a wide array of drugs while in the Navy, and that his use of drugs impaired his ability to service.  The NDRB denied his second petition as well. 
 
The Board carefully reviewed the materials that you provided and carefully considered Petitioner’s contentions, including that he feels he should have been put on probation instead of being harshly discharged.  Petitioner also states that he is a different person now, and he included with his petition several commendatory letters.   The Board commends the Petitioner on the success he has attained as demonstrated in his supporting letters.  Nevertheless, the Board found that the materials presented by the Petitioner fell short of demonstrating that he warranted relief.  As such, after careful review of the materials, the Board did not find evidence sufficient to warrant a change to Petitioner’s characterization of service, nor did it find evidence to support clemency. 
  
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken.  He is 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,