DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 00429-16 

DEC 22 2016 

Dear:
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of title 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 of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A threemember 
panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 30 August 2016. The names and votes ofthe members of the 
panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror 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 ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, 
regulations, and policies. 

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

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period ofactive duty on 23 April 1981. You served over 
one year without disciplinary incident. On 6 October 1982, you received nonjudicial punishment 
(NJP) for dereliction ofduty and sleeping on watch, and were awarded forfeiture of pay, 30 days 
extra duty and reduction in rank. On 13 October 1982, you received a second NJP for the same 
offenses, and were awarded forfeiture ofpay, 30 days extra duty and reduction in rank. On 
3 August 1983, you received a third NJP for two absences from your appointed place of duty, 
and were awarded forfeiture of pay. On 20 October 1983, you received a fourth NJP for three 
days ofunauthorized absence and wrongful use and possession of marijuana. You were awarded 
45 days restriction, extra duty, reduction in rank, and forfeiture ofpay. On 29 October 1983, you 
were notified ofadil1inistrative separation proceedings and waived your right to appear before an 
administrative separation board. Your commanding officer recommended that you be separated 
with an other than honorable characterization ofservice on the basis ofdrug abuse and a pattern 
of misconduct. On 15 December 1983, you were so discharged. 

The Board considered your personal statement that you received NJP for possession ofcannabis 
and that you still struggle with substance abuse. Furthermore, the Board noted that you state you 
were recently incarcerated for cannabis cultivation and that you are currently homeless.

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed your desire to 
upgrade your discharge, as well as your personal statement that you still struggle with substance 
abuse, you were recently incarcerated for cannabis cultivation, and are currently homeless. 
Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization 
of your discharge given the seriousness of wrongful use and possession ofmarijuana while on 
active duty in the military and because of the frequency ofyour misconduct during nearly three 
years of service. The Board considered your four NJPs, the procedure by which you were 
notified of administrative separation proceedings, and determined that your record did not reflect 
an error or injustice that warranted upgrading your service characterization. Accordingly, your 
application has been denied. 

It is regrettable that the circumstances of your case are such 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 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, 


Executive Director