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

TAL 
Docket No: 7233-16 
OCT 10 2017 


This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour 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 oflimitations and consider your application on its merits. A three­member panel ofthe Boatd for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive ~ession, considered your application on 5 July 2017. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings ofthis 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. 

On 21 October 1978, you were granted a drug abuse waiver for pre-service marijuana use. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty onl5 February 1979. You served for a year without disciplinary incident, but during the period from 8 February 1980 to 25 September 1980 you received nonjudicial punishment on two occasions and were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM). Your offenses were absence from your appointed place of duty, wrongful possession ofmarijuana, failure to obey a lawful order, assault, and making a threat. On 14 December 1982, you were once again convicted by an SPCM; your offenses were unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period of 115 days and missing ship's movement. The sentence imposed was confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay, reduction in paygrade, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 2 November 1983, you received the BCD after appellate review was complete. 
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. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors and your contentions that you were approved for leave because your mother had a heart attack, but you were not told you could 
not miss ship's movement and that you were told you could apply for an upgrade because this incident was a combination oferrors. The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because ofthe seriousness ofyour misconduct that resulted in two NJPs, two SPCM, a period of UA totaling nearly four months and a BCD. In regard to your contentions, the Board relies on a presumption ofregularity to support the official actions of public officers and, in the absence ofsubstantial evidence to the contrary, will presume that they have properly discharged their official duties. Your allegations that you were not told you could not miss ship's movement, failed to overcome that presumption. The Board was not persuaded by your mitigating statement that this incident was a combination oferrors. Finally, the Board concluded that the severity ofyour misconduct outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your 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 of regularity 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