DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 RLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 3571-19 Ref: Signature Date Dear : This is in reference to your application of 11 March 2019 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 for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found that 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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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 naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You enlisted in the Navy on 31 July 2001. On 7 March 2002, you went to non-judicial punishment (NJP) for failing to obey a lawful order or regulation, and for drunk and disorderly conduct. The underlying incident for your NJP was drinking alcohol in excess until you passed out and you required hospitalization for acute alcohol poisoning. Following your NJP, you enrolled in ASAM Level 2.0 intensive outpatient treatment for alcohol dependence and successfully completed such treatment on 24 April 2002. However, in January 2003 you were apprehended by Shore Patrol in for drunk and disorderly conduct. While in custody you acted erratically, resisted arrest, and assaulted military law enforcement personnel. Subsequently, your command placed you on “liberty risk.” Unfortunately, on 3 February 2003 you were discovered in possession of alcohol in violation of your liberty risk order. On 18 February 2003, you were notified that you were being processed for an administrative discharge for being an alcohol rehabilitation failure and for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. You elected in writing to waive your rights to consult with counsel and include a written rebuttal statement to the proposed separation. On 26 March 2003, you were separated from the Navy with a general (under honorable conditions) (GEN) characterization of service, and assigned an “RE-4” reentry code. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your contentions that included, but were not limited to: (a) you were never given a chance to complete the program before getting discharged, (b) your intent was to successfully complete the program because you wanted to stay in the Navy, (c) you felt the instructor wasn’t being fair with his assumption that you wouldn’t be a good candidate for the program, (d) after leaving the Navyyou completed an alcoholic rehabilitation program on your own, and (e) since the completion of the program on your own, you have made it a point to turn your life around and made it a priority to stay away from alcohol. However, the Board determined these mitigating factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant upgrading your discharge or granting any other relief in your case. The Board initially noted, contrary to your contentions, that you did successfully complete the ASAM Level 2.0 outpatient alcohol rehabilitation treatment at Naval Hospital and followed your aftercare plan prior to your relapse. The Board determined by virtue of your subsequent alcohol-related incidents that you met the separation criteria for alcohol rehabilitation failure. Additionally, absent a material error or injustice, the Board generally will not summarily grant relief solely for the purpose of facilitating VA benefits, or enhancing educational or employment opportunities. Lastly, there is no provision of federal law or in Navy/Marine Corps regulations that provides for a discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good post-service conduct. The Board concluded that your current characterization does not reflect an error or injustice that merits corrective action. Additionally, the Board reviewed your application under the recent guidance provided in the Under Secretary of Defense’s memorandum dated 25 July 2018 entitled, “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations” (USD Memo). The purpose of the USD Memo is to ease the process for veterans seeking redress and assist Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records “in determining whether relief is warranted on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency.” The USD Memo noted that “increasing attention is being paid to…the circumstances under which citizens should be considered for second chances and the restoration of rights forfeited,” and that “BCM/NRs have the authority to upgrade discharges or correct military records to ensure fundamental fairness.” The USD Memo sets clear standards and principles to guide BCM/NRs in application of their equitable relief authority, and further explains that boards shall consider a number of factors to determine whether to grant relief. However, even in light of the USD Memo, the Board still concluded that your request does not merit relief. Additionally, the Board determined that, in fairness to those Sailors who serve honorably and without incident, Sailors should receive no higher discharge characterization than is due. The Board believed that, even though flawless service is not required for an honorable discharge, in this case a GEN discharge is appropriate. Accordingly, the Board still similarly concluded after reviewing the record holistically and given the totality of the circumstances, that you only merit a GEN characterization of service and no higher, and that the reentry code should remain “RE-4.” 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. Sincerely,