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

Docket No: 9392-17 
Ref: Signature date 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to 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 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 of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three-
member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 28 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, as well as 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

Prior to your enlistment in the Navy, on 13 September 1990, you completed a drug and alcohol 
abuse statement of understanding. You enlisted and began a period of active service on 14 
September 1990. On 24 September 1990, you were counseled on your retention in naval service, 
despite your defective enlistment and induction due to failure to disclose previous drug abuse. 
On 30 October 1991, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for the following offenses: 
unauthorized absence (UA), failure to obey a lawful order, drunk on duty, and violation of a 
general article disorderly conduct, drunkenness. On 12 March 1992, you completed level II 
alcohol rehabilitation treatment. On 27 July 1992, you again received NJP for UA. On 2 
September 1992, you were counseled on your misconduct and your retention in naval service, 
and notified further deficiencies may result in administrative separation. On 2 Mar 1994, you 
received NJP for the following offenses: UA, falling asleep at your post, and with wrongful 
previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor, showing up incapacitated for the proper 
performance of your duties. On 29 March 1994, you were notified of administrative separation 
proceedings, at which point you declined your right to counsel and waived your procedural 
rights. On 4 April 1994, your Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other 
honorable conditions due to alcohol rehabilitation failure and misconduct due to pattern of 
misconduct. On 12 April 1994, the discharge authority approved and directed your discharge, 
and you were discharged on 21 April 1994. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors and contentions, such as your 
regretting your actions, your taking responsibility for your actions, your desire to upgrade your 
discharge, that you changed your life, that you were going through a hard time with a divorce, as 
well as that you were very young and didn’t understand the importance of your career. The 
Board appreciated the steps you have taken with your life, your feelings about your past actions, 
and the matters mitigating your misconduct. However, the Board concluded there is insufficient 
evidence or mitigation to warrant relief in your case given the extent of your repeated 
misconduct, rehabilitation failure, and three NJPs. 

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 of an official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

4/11/2019 

Executive Director