DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 


Docket No: 7629-20 
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 you did not file your application in a timely manner, the statute of limitations was waived in accordance with the 25 August 2017 guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Kurta Memo). A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 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 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies, to include the Kurta Memo, the 3 September 2014 guidance from the Secretary of Defense regarding discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Hagel Memo), and the 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). The Board also considered an advisory opinion (AO) from a qualified mental health professional dated 14 June 2021. 

The Board determined that your personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the Board determined a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record.
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 28 May 1996. On 9 April 1997, you received nonjudicial punishment for wrongful use of cocaine. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and exercised your right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 24 July 1997, the ADB determined that the preponderance of the evidence supported a finding of misconduct due to drug abuse but, by a vote of two to one, recommended retention. Your CO did not concur with the ADB majority’s recommendation and, noting his belief you had no potential for further useful naval service, recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions (GEN), characterization of service. The discharge authority concurred with the CO and directed that you be discharged by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse with a GEN characterization of service. On 10 October 1997, you were discharged.
 
As part of the Board’s review, a qualified mental health professional reviewed your request and provided the Board with an AO on 14 June 2021. The AO stated the available evidence supported your contention you suffered from undiagnosed PTSD incurred during military service and your in-service misconduct could be attributed to a mental health condition. 

The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contentions that you were young, naïve, and made regrettable choices during your military service. The Board also considered your extensive post-service record, positive impact on others as noted by the numerous advocacy letters and articles, and your professional accomplishments after overcoming countless hurdles. Unfortunately, the Board concluded your GEN characterization of service already reflects an appropriate level of clemency for your drug-related misconduct. Further, the Board determined you were appropriately assigned a RE-4 (not recommended for reenlistment) reentry code. The Board, applying liberal consideration, did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants upgrading your characterization of service. 

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, your contentions addressed above, and your post-service record. Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief. Specifically, the Board determined your misconduct outweighed these mitigating factors. 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, 
7/7/2021 

2