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

Docket No: 5977-16 
JUL 6 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. 

A three-member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 14 April 2017. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 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. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal 
appearance with or without counsel will 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. 

On 17 July 2013, a preliminary inquiry (PI) was initiated into a possible Violation of Article l 12a 
(wrongful use ofa controlled substance) ofthe Uniform Code ofMilitary Justice (UCMJ) after 
you provided a urine sample during a random command urinalysis that tested positive for 
oxycodone and oxymorphone. Subsequently, your Commanding Officer (CO) notified you of 
his intent to impose nonjudicial punishment (NJP). You refused NJP and demanded trial by 
court-martial. On 10 September 2013, your CO submitted a Report ofMisconduct due to your 
noncompliance with the Navy's "Zero Tolerance" Policy, and recommended that you be required 
to show cause for retention in naval service before a Board of Inquiry (BOI). In response, you 
submitted a statement that you accidently took the oxycodone because the bottle was sitting next 
to a bottle ofa current prescription ofhydrocodone. 

Prior to the convening ofthe BOI, on 16 June 2014, the 
Promotion Selection Board convened. You were selected with a projected 
promotion date of 1 December 2015. However, your selection was withheld, pending review of 
adverse material. On 17 November 2015, the BOI convened. By unanimous vote, the BOI 
found the preponderance ofthe evidence did not support misconduct and substandard 
performance, and recommended that you be retained in the naval service. Despite your 
command's recommendation to reinstate your promotion to , the Chief ofNaval 
Operations recommended your name be removed from the Promotion List, stating that 
your positive test for a controlled substance, without a current prescription, called into question 
your judgment and decision making, and that he did not have the trust and confidence to 
recommend you for promotion. On 7 June 2016, the Secretary ofthe Navy removed your name 
from the Promotion List. 

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully considered your 
argument that you were charged with wrongful use ofa controlled substance, resulting in your 
name being removed from the Promotion List, although a BOI found that your use 
of Oxycodone was not wrongful and your CO recommended immediate reinstatement ofyour 
promotion. The Board also considered your argument that your service record and 
community involvement justify your reinstatement ofyour promotion. The Board concluded 
these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief, given the seriousness ofyour misconduct. In 
this regard, the evidence showed, in part, that you failed to adhere to the Navy's "Zero 
Tolerance" Policy. The Board acknowledged the findings ofthe BOI and determined that 
different authorities can review the same evidence and come to different conclusions. Thus, the 
Board concluded that the Secretary ofthe Navy's decision to remove your name from the FYlS 
Promotion List is not in error or unjust. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are such that favorable action cannot be taken 
at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of 
new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. 
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 of an official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director