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


Docket No: 2790-18 
MAR 04 2019 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of title IO of the 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 19 November 2018. 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 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. 

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 issue(s) 
involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and 
considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active service on 18 February 1983. The same 
day you signed the US Navy drug abuse statement of understanding. On 29 September 1983, 
you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use of marijuana. On 13 October 1983, 
you received NJP for unauthorized absence (UA) and failure to obey a lawful order by not being 
in your assigned rack, drinking alcohol on restriction, and watching television while on 
restriction. On 18 January 1984, you were convicted at a special court-martial (SPCM) for 
failure to obey a lawful order and knowingly and wrongfully using marijuana. On 24 January 
1984, a substance abuse report identified you as drug user and noted that after being placed on 
urinary surveillance, all your samples were positive for cannabinoids. On 25 April 1984, you 
were notified of administrative separation processing for misconduct due to pattern of 
misconduct and drug abuse. You consulted counsel and elected an administrative discharge 
board (ADB). On 17 May 1984, the ADB convened and recommended administrative separation 
with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct-pattern 
of misconduct. On 13 June 1984, the discharge authority directed an OTH character of service 
and on 20 June 1984, you were discharged. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such your desire to upgrade your 
discharge and contention you were promised the next status of a general discharge, you were 
subjected to racism, bias, and you did the only thing you knew how to do which was to fight. 
The Board noted your record does not contain, and you provided no evidence to support your 
contentions. The Board concluded there is insufficient evidence to warrant relief in your case 
given your pattern of misconduct which resulted in two NJPs and a SPCM. ln this regard, the 
Board concluded the seriousness of your misconduct outweighed your desire to upgrade your 
discharge. 

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, 



Executive Director