Docket No: 1841-20 
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 27 July 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. 
 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 19 March 2007.  On 12 July 2007, you were counseled regarding deficiencies in conduct and advised that failure to take corrective action could result in administrative separation and/or judicial proceedings.  On 14 February 2008, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA), underage drinking and not having automobile insurance.  You were awarded forfeiture of pay, restriction, extra duties, and reduction in rank (RIR); the forfeiture of pay was suspended for six months.  On 15 May 2008, you received a second NJP for disrespect toward a gunnery sergeant and disobeying a lawful order.  You were awarded forfeiture of pay, restriction, and extra duties.  On 13 November 2008, you received a third NJP for UA, disrespecting a staff sergeant and a corporal, and assault.  You were awarded forfeiture of pay, restriction, and extra duties; the forfeiture of pay was suspended for two months.  On 3 February 2009, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) for violating Article 86 (UA) and Article 91 (disrespect toward a noncommissioned officer) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  You were sentenced to confinement for 25 days and RIR.  Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated due to misconduct.  On 8 April 2009, you were counseled that you were not recommended for reenlistment due to a pattern of misconduct.  On 11 April 2009, you were discharged with an under other than honorable conditions (OTH) characterization of service, a separation code “HKA1” (misconduct, due to a pattern of misconduct), a reentry (RE) code “RE-4” (not recommend for reenlistment), and a narrative reason for separation “misconduct.” 
 
You request the Board change your RE code and narrative reason for separation.  You assert error and injustice because you never assaulted or disrespected a staff sergeant or corporal.  In support of your petition, you attached a letter from a former corporal stating he did not remember being assaulted by you.  Additionally, you attached letters of support for your effort to enlist in National Guard. 
 
Your original service record was incomplete and did not contain all documentation pertaining to your separation from the Marine Corps.  The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as the information available in your record of service, and your contentions.  However, the Board ultimately concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge or your RE code given your misconduct that resulted in three NJPs and a SCM, all of which occurred after you had been warned about the potential for administrative action, to include discharge, if you failed to take corrective action on your deficiencies.  The Board noted your letter from the corporal; however, you provided no evidence regarding the offenses for which you were charged and found guilty in the two other NJPs or the SCM.  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.   
 
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,