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

Docket No: 8339-19 
Ref: Signature date 

Dear

This letter 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 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 10 February 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 25 March 2002.  On 5 August 2003, you received an evaluation with an individual trait average (ITA) of 3.00.  You rater’s comments included:  “Below average performer who routinely questions the motives of superiors, asks for an undue amount of justification when assigned tasks, inconsistent in accepting direction and reacting to supervision. When counseled on negative actions and behavior, he consistently fails to take positive, corrective action on deficiencies.”  On 28 September 2003, you were transferred to              .  On 22 July 2004, you received an evaluation report with an ITA of 2.50 and your rate’s comments included:  “not performing to the standards of a third class petty officer” and “lacks maturity and consistently makes bad decision on and off duty.” On 8 February 2005, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP), where you pleaded guilty to drunken/reckless operation of a vehicle.  You were awarded forfeitures of pay and reduction in rank.  On 4 March 2005, administrative action was initiated to separate you from the naval service by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  After consulting with counsel, you elected to submit a statement requesting an honorable discharge.  In your statement, you contended that you only had one NJP, and had a drinking problem that began when you were stationed in  because you had very little to do.  Your commanding officer recommended that you receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge and the separation authority approved your separation from the Navy.  On 26 August 2005, you were counseled that you were not eligible for reenlistment and discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service, and a reentry (RE) code RE-4.  Subsequently, you petitioned the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) requesting your discharge be upgraded to honorable, contending that your NJP was an isolated incident and you had exemplary post-service conduct.  On 1 August 2007, NDRB informed you of their decision that your discharge was equitable and no change was warranted because your serious misconduct could have resulted in a punitive discharge if adjudged at a court-martial, and that there were other negative aspects of your performance as indicated in your evaluations. 

You request the Board upgrade your characterization of service to honorable, and change your RE code.  You assert that your discharge was unjust because you were not provided any medical or counseling services for alcohol addiction while on active duty.  You state that, since your discharge, you obtained counseling services to help you with your alcohol abuse and have been sober for over five years.
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and contentions.  However, the Board concluded that these factors were insufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your serious misconduct.  The Board also noted that you provided no evidence to support your contentions.  Absent of such evidence, the Board relied upon the presumption of regularity and presumed that the officials acted in accordance with governing law/policy and in good faith.  The Board noted your post-service conduct; however, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of time. 

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,