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

Docket No: 8476-19 
Ref: Signature Date 

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 14 April 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 17 February 1988. On 5 July1989, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful possession of drug paraphernalia and wrongful use of marijuana.  You were awarded forfeiture of pay, restriction, extra duties, and reduction in rank.  On 6 July 1989, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  After being afforded all of your procedural rights, you waived them, and your case was forwarded to the separation authority for review.  Your commanding officer recommended that you receive an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service and the separation authority approved and directed your separation from the Navy.  On 25 July 1989, you received a second NJP for unauthorized absence and breaking restriction and were awarded forfeiture of pay and confinement on bread and water for three days; the confinement was suspended for 60 days.  On 11 August 1989, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service. 

You request the Board upgrade your discharge; however, you did not specify the characterization of service you are seeking.  You assert you had a family emergency and requested to be discharged but did not know it would be a negative characterization of service.  In support of your petition, you attached a personal statement.  You claim you were detained while leaving base in April 1989.  You served your punishment and accepted the consequences.  It was an isolated incident.  According to your recollection, you asked to be released to go home to help your mother and family and you were granted a separation from the Navy.  You claim you were not “kicked out or ‘thrown out of the Navy.” Lastly, you state your breathing, back, shoulder, and emotional state have been affected by your service.  In support of your petition, you attached a letter of support from a Marine who served on the USS_____with you.
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and contentions and concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct.  In regards to your contention that you only had one incident during your year and a half of service, the Board noted that, although a Sailor’s service is generally characterized at the time of discharge based on performance and conduct throughout the entire enlistment, the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident of misconduct may provide the basis of characterization of service.  Moreover, generally, characterization under OTH conditions is warranted for misconduct.  With respect to your contention that you requested separation and did not know you would receive an unfavorable characterization of service, the Board noted that you were advised in writing by your command that you were being recommended for separation and, if approved, the characterization of service would be OTH.  Additionally, you opted not to consult with Counsel and elected to waive your other rights.  The Board noted that you provided no evidence to support your contentions.  Absent 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.  Further, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for an upgrade in the characterization of service solely due 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,