Docket No: 8467-20/5578-12 
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.     
 
Because your application was submitted with new evidence not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your application.  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session on 17 February 2021, has carefully examined your current request.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  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 presented as evidence a personal statement.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined that the documentation that you provided, even though not previously considered by the Board, was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.   
 
In regard to your contention that your discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in four years, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to your contention.  The record clearly shows that you received three non-judicial punishments (NJP) and tested positive for marijuana prior to discharge.  In regard to your contention that you tested positive for marijuana due to eating a cake in the  that contained poppy seeds, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention.  The Board also noted that the record shows that you were notified of and waived your right to present your case to an Administrative Discharge Board (ADB).  In doing so, you gave up your first and best opportunity to advocate for retention, assistance, or a more favorable characterization of service.   
  
In regard to your contentions that since discharge, you received a degree in journalism, worked as a fireman, became part of a prison ministry outreach team at your church, volunteered at the local correctional facilities and served as the Chaplain for the  Department of Corrections for over 17 years, the Board noted while commendable, your post service conduct does not excuse your conduct while enlisted in the Navy or the basis for your discharge.  Regarding your contention that it has been 36 years since your discharge, the Board noted that there is no provision in law or regulations that allows for re-characterization of a discharge automatically, due solely to the passage of time. 
 
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 all of your contentions and assertions.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that your repeated 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,