Docket No. 2150-20 
Ref: Signature Date 



This is in reference to your application of 3 March 2020 for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, 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 case on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in December 1992.  Between May 1995 and January 1996, non-judicial punishment was imposed on you four separate times for misconduct that included disrespect, provoking words, uttering worthless checks, unauthorized absences, false official statement, drunk driving, orders violations, and insubordination.  As a result of your misconduct, you were notified of administrative separation processing on 25 January 1996 and discharged on 24 April 1996 with an Other than Honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  Post-discharge, you provided evidence that you raised a family and became a productive member of society. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve an upgrade to your characterization of service.  You claim responsibility for your actions while on active duty but assert an unjust discharge. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief.  In examining your record of misconduct, the Board felt that your OTH characterization of service was based on the number of incidents and seriousness of your actions.  In approximately a nine-month period, you committed 10 military offenses that resulted in four non-judicial punishments.  Of those 10 offenses, several qualified for punitive discharges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  The Board also considered your post-discharge good character evidence in making their finding.  While the Board was pleased that you have led a productive and successful life after the military, they concluded the mitigation offered by your post-discharge character was insufficient to overcome the serious and numerous incidents of misconduct documented in your record.  Therefore, they felt your assigned characterization of service remains appropriate despite the mitigation evidence you provided.  Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. 

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.