DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

DocketNo: 2690-17 
AUG 25 20l8 

Dear 

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. After careful and conscientious 
consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to 
establish the existence ofprobable 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 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 25 June 2018. The names and votes of the 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 ofyour naval record and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

On 26 August 1986, you reenlisted in the Navy after serving over seven years ofprior honorable 
service. On 11 August 1983, during your previous enlistment, you were counseled regarding 
substance abuse ofmarijuana. You were warned that further deficiencies in your performance 
and/or conduct could result in administrative discharge action. On 24December1987, you 
initiated a self-referral for drug and alcohol rehabilitation treatment. On 7 January 1988, your 
Executive Officer was informed about your treatment and you were referred to the Counseling 
and Assistance Center (CAAC), due to your selfreferral for the use o'f cocaine. You were 
evaluated as being psychologically dependent on marijuana and cocaine based on your 
disclosures ofuse. As a result ofyour cocaine use, the report states you had severe depression, 
thoughts of suicide, inability to sleep and lost 80 pounds. Further, you were evaluated as an 
alcohol abuser based on your use of alcohol to medicate the withdrawal symptoms. It was 
recommended that you be transfer to an Alcohol Rehabilitation Center (ARC) as soon as possible 
and on March 1988, a Case Manager note from the Naval Alcohol Rehabilitation Center 
reported, in part, that you did not successfully complete the rehabilitation program. It was felt 
that your drug dependence was not in remission, and due to your lack to sufficient progress while 
in treatment and based on clinical observation, prognosis for you to remain chemically free was 
poor. You were advised to adhere to your aftercare plan. On 1 April 1988, you received 
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use of cocaine. Subsequently, administrative 
discharge action was initiated to separate you for misconduct due to drug abuse. After being 
afforded all ofyour procedural rights, you waived your right to request that your case be heard 
by an administrative discharge board. Your case was forwarded to the separation authority, and· 
it was directed that you receive an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to drug abuse. 
You received an OTH discharge on 29 July 1988. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade 
your discharge and your contentions that you were young and fighting a drug addiction, did not 
seek help in the Navy, had become a model citizen and requesting an upgrade in order to receive 
Department of Veterans Affairs benefits. The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient 
to warrant an upgrade to your discharge given your misconduct, which resulted in a NJP for 
wrongful drug use, and failure to adhere to your commands drug and alcohol rehabilitation 
program. 

Itis regretted that the circumstances ofyour 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. 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 ofan official naval record, the burden is on the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director