Docket No: 3394-19 
Ref: Signature Date 


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 26 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 1 November 1982. In January 1983, you were identified as having fraudulently enlisted by reason of pre-service police involvement.  The Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) authorized your retention in military service.  On 13 September 1983, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a period of unauthorized absence (UA) from 15-22 August 1983 and for disobeying a lawful order.  On 17 January 1984, you were counseled for failing to adhere to military rules and regulations and failure to demonstrate potential for leadership or professional development.  On 16 January 1984, you received NJP for failing to get out of your rack after receiving a lawful order from a corporal to do so.  On 24 February 1984, you again received NJP for failing to clean your weapon in your room when ordered to do so and for disrespectful language.  On 8 March 1984, you were found guilty at summary court-martial of disrespectful language and violating a lawful order.  You were advised of administrative separation proceedings against you and waived your right to appear before an administrative separation board.  The Staff Judge Advocate reviewed your administrative discharge and the proceedings were found to be sufficient in law and fact.  On 20 April 1984, you were discharged from the Marine Corps on the basis of misconduct and received an other than honorable characterization of service and a reentry (RE) code of RE-4. 

In your petition to the Board, you ask for an upgrade to your other than honorable discharge to an honorable characterization of service.  You state that you were told that you were not doing that well and that you should get out of the Marine Corps.  You claim that you “signed off with the impression” that you would receive a general discharge that would upgrade to an honorable after a certain amount of time.  You assert that you were informed that it would not interfere with you obtaining benefits, but Veterans Affairs (VA) has told you that you need an upgrade.  You contend that a correction is warranted to allow you to access medical care and a service-connection determination for disabilities. 

The Board, in its review of your entire application, carefully considered your request for an upgrade to your discharge characterization.  The Board noted your contention that you did not fully appreciate that you would receive an other than honorable discharge and instead believed you would receive a general discharge that would be upgraded over time.  The Board reviewed the information in your service record and found that you were properly informed of the other than discharge characterization when you were notified of administrative separation proceedings against you, and that you elected to waive your right to appear before an administrative separation board.  Additionally, the Board noted that your other than honorable discharge recommendation was reviewed by the Staff Judge Advocate and was found sufficient in law and fact.  The Board concluded that you were appropriately processed for an other than honorable discharge, and that the evidence of misconduct in your record, as documented by three NJPs and one summary court-martial conviction, supported your current discharge.  Even in consideration of your desire to obtain benefits from the VA and in light of your contention that you believed you would eventually hold an honorable characterization, the Board found that your discharge was issued without error or injustice, and that you did not provide sufficient evidence to support an upgrade. 

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. 




3