Docket No: 2962-19
Ref: Signature Date 

Dear 


This is in reference to your application for correction of your husband’s naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (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 Boards, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2020.  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 husband’s naval record, as well as 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 issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record.received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence (UA).  The record reflects that the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) conducted an investigation into alleged misconduct involving the possession, sale, and use of narcotics, marijuana, and restricted drugs.  On 8 October 1968, prior to the questioning of by the ONI special agent, was informed of his rights and the misconduct he was alleged to have committed.  made a free and voluntary statement in which he admitted that he had purchased marijuana and used marijuana on multiple occasions.  On 26 November 1968,. received his second NJP for wrongful use of marijuana. Subsequently, on 20 January 1969, was notified of an administrative action to separate him from the naval service.  
After consulting with legal counsel, elected his right to present his case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).  An ADB was convened and found that   had committed misconduct and recommended administrative discharge from the naval service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  naval service with an OTH characterization of service.  On 24 March 1969, was discharged. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in this case, including your desire to upgrade characterization of service.  The Board considered your contention that your husband had a serious injustice done against him during his time in the Navy.  He was injured while onboard his ship and transported to the naval hospital.  While at the hospital, was approached by a naval officer at his bed and was told that he was guilty of possessing drugs on the ship and forced him to sign a discharge form.  He was threatened that if he did not sign the form he could receive a court-martial.  You further contend that the drugs were not , as they were located on the ship while he was in the hospital.  His fellow shipmates knew he could not defend himself against the charges since he was not on the ship.  He was not asked for his side of the story.  The Board concluded that these factors were insufficient to warrant relief in this case because of the seriousness of repeated misconduct that resulted in two NJPs, which included wrongful drug use.  In regard to your contention, there is no evidence in the record and you did not provide any evidence to support your contention.  Under the totality of the circumstances, the Board discerned no probable material error or injustice in the discharge. 

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 the submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or 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.