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

Docket No: 2835-21 

Dear Petitioner: 

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 30 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 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). 
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 that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

You enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve on 15 July 1991. On 12 May 1995, a summary court-martial (SCM) convicted you of unauthorized absence (UA) for one day, failure to go at prescribed time to appointed place of duty, and three specifications of wrongful use of amphetamine/methamphetamine. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. 

After electing to waive your rights, your commanding officer (CO) forwarded your package to the separation authority (SA) recommending your discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, with and other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. The SA approved the CO’s recommendation on 27 July 1995. However, on 31 July 1995, you received non-judicial punishments (NJP) for wrongfully use of amphetamine/methamphetamine and on 7 August 1995, you were so discharged. 

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 the brief submitted by your counsel, your professional resume, your post-service conduct, and your desire to upgrade your discharge, change the narrative reason for separation, separation code, reenlistment code, and your contentions that: (a) your command involuntarily extended you past your end of active service (EAS) for the purpose of administrative separation; (b) shortly before your EAS, you were approached by the administrative section which presented you with a draft Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) stating a service characterization of “Honorable” and the reason for separate as the fulfillment of his military service obligation; and (c) since discharge, you received treatment for your substance abuse, cleaned up your life and you are now a successful Environmental Health & Safety Specialist with over 10 years of experience in the industry. 

The Board noted that the record contains documented evidence, which is contrary to your contention that your command involuntarily extended you past your end of active service (EAS) for the purpose of administrative separation. The record clearly shows that on 18 March 1993, you signed an agreement to extend your enlistment for three months in order to be assigned as a Marine Corps Security Guard (MSG). As a result, your EAS was moved to 14 October 1995. The Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention that you were approached by the administrative section, which presented you with a draft DD Form 214. Lastly, the Board noted that while commendable, your post service conduct does not excuse your conduct while enlisted in the Marine Corps or the basis for your discharge. 

Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief. Specifically, the Board determined that your four NJP, SCM conviction, and violation of the Navy’s “Zero Tolerance” drug policy, 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, 
7/9/2021