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

Docket No: 8012-17 
MAY O1 2019 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of Title 10, 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 of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application 
was denied. 

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. Your 
request was carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval 
Records, sitting in executive session on 31 January 2019. 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 of this 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. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 14 March 94. On 2 July 1995, 
you began an unauthorized absence (UA) from your ship, and you missed that ship's movement 
on 6 July 1995. On 2 August 1995, you were placed in deserter status, which lasted until you 
surrendered on 4 August 1995. After you surrendered, a sample of your urine tested positive for 
marijuana. Your commanding officer (CO) imposed nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 9 
September 1995 for your UA, missing movement, and wrongful use of marijuana. Subsequently, 
he initiated administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and 
commission of a serious offense, and advised you that you could receive an other than honorable 
(OTH) characterization of service. After you waived your rights, your case was forwarded to the 
separation authority with the recommendation that you be discharged with an OTH 
characterization of service. The separation authority concurred with your CO's recommendation 
and directed that you be discharged with an OTH characterization of service. On 30 October 
1995, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service by reason of misconduct. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your otherwise 
commendable service, your post-service accomplishments, and your desire to upgrade your 
discharge, as well as your assertions that you left your ship in an effort to reconcile with your 
estranged wife. Also, the Board considered your assertion that you only took a puff from a 
marijuana cigarette and realized you made a terrible error in judgment, a lapse you said would 
not have occurred but for the loss of your wife. The Board also considered your assertions that 
your depression and anxiety caused you to fear telling your command, and that your clear 
thinking was adversely affected as well as your belief that use of marijuana was a de minimus 
offense. The Board, however, concluded that these factors and assertions were not sufficient to 
warrant a change to your discharge, given the serious nature of your misconduct. The Board 
noted that you waived your right to have your case heard before an administrative discharge 
board, your best chance for retention or to receive a better characterization of service. The Board 
also noted that there is no evidence, and you submitted none, to support your assertions. 

It is regretted 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 of new matters. New 
matters are those 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 of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to 
demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

 

Executive Director