Docket No: 7200-19 

 
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 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 Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 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 and began a period of active duty on 2 October 1979.  On 21 April 1982, you received nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence from 10 March 1982 to 5 April 1982 and missing ship’s movement.  On 16 July 1982, you were convicted by special court-martial for wrongful possession, transfer, and sale of marijuana on two occasions.  You were sentenced to confinement, forfeiture, reduction in rank, and a bad-conduct discharge (BCD).  The BCD was subsequently approved at all levels of review, and, on 25 August 1983, you were discharged. 
 
The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contentions that your post-service record and accomplishments warrant clemency and an upgraded characterization of service, and that to “deny the upgrade would be a serious injustice” given your “contributions to society” since discharge.  Specifically, you contend your extensive post-service education, degrees, and certifications, coupled with your work as the owner/operator of  , which is known for its positive treatment of individuals displaced by natural disasters and those who cannot afford medical care.  Additionally, the Board considered your acknowledgement that the charges you were “accused of were of a serious nature” and your contention that current sentencing guidelines for marijuana-related offenses have become extensively less severe “showing not only a shift in society’s views on marijuana but also in the legal system.”  Further, the Board considered your contention that you have been “adequately punished under the societal views” you were sentenced under.  Lastly, the Board considered the advocacy letters submitted on your behalf, which detail your “stunning record of sacrificing for others” and request upgrade so you “could be treating veterans,” who you have been prevented from helping because of your discharge.  In the end, the Board noted that, although it cannot set aside a conviction, it may grant clemency in the form of changing a characterization of service, even one awarded by a court-martial.  Unfortunately, despite the advocacy letters submitted on your behalf and your post-service accomplishments, the Board, applying liberal consideration, did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants changing your BCD.  In this regard, the Board noted the serious and repeated nature of your misconduct, which did not involve merely the possession or use of marijuana its transfer and sale on two occasions, as well as your lengthy unauthorized absence and missing ship’s movement.  
 
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, 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,  

Executive Director