DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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


Docket No: 1199-16 
JAN 26 2017 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 10 ofthe United States Code, section 1552. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of 
justice to waive the statute oflimitations and consider your application on its merits. A threemember 
panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 24 October 2016. 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 ofthis 
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, 
regulations, and policies. 

After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence 
submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period ofactive duty on 5 January 1981. On 19 June 1984, 
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use ofcocaine. You were counseled 
and notified ofyour deficiencies and advised ofrecommended corrective action and available 
assistance. You were warned that failure to adhere to the counseling/warning may be grounds 
for administrative separation action. On 4 June 1985, you received NJP for wrongful use of 
cocaine. In view ofthe foregoing, admimstrative discharge action was initiated by reason of 
misconduct. You were advised ofyour rights and elected to waive your procedural rights. Your 
commanding officer recommended an other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of 
misconduct as evidenced by your drug abuse. The discharge authority concurred with the 
recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason ofmisconduct. On 8 July 1985, you 
were so discharged. 

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully considered your desire to 
upgrade your characterization of service. The Board also weighed all potentially mitigating 
factors, such as your assertion that you were hanging out with the wrong people and that your 
service prior to the rmsconduct should count for something. Nevertheless, the Board concluded 
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization ofyour discharge, given the 
seriousness of your misconduct which resulted in two NJPs. With regard to your assertions, the 
Board noted that hanging out with the wrong people does not excuse you ofresponsibility for 
your actions, and that your period ofservice without misconduct is not sufficiently mitigating to 
warrant re-characterizing your discharge. Further, the Board noted that after your first NJP for 
drug abuse, you were counseled and received a retention warning. You were afforded an 
opportunity to continue your military service, yet you received another NJP for the same offense. 
Finally, the Board noted that the record shows that you were notified of and waived your 
procedural right to present your case to an administrative board. In doing so, you gave up your 
best opportunity to advocate for retention or a more.favorable characterization ofservice. 
Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are ~uch that favorable action cannot be taken. 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission ofnew and material 
evidence within one year from the date ofthe Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not 
previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. In this regard, it is 
important to keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity attaches to all official records. 
Consequently, when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the burden is on the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director