Dear :   
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted 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 19 February 2021.  The names and votes of the panel members 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 the 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, to include the 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo).   
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 8 September 1999.  On 30 September 2002 you received a “Page 11” counselling/retention warning (Page 11) for failing to conduct your personal affairs in a manner expected of a Marine of your rank, and for demonstrating immaturity and a seeming inability to control your domestic issues.  On 1 November 2002 you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for assault as a result of your involvement in an altercation with your spouse that turned physical when you grabbed him by the throat and shirt.  On 6 February 2003 your command issued you a “no contact” order to have no communications with your spouse (other than communicating through the command).  On 20 February 2003 you received a second NJP for false official statement and for being involved in a domestic argument that turned physically violent.  On 12 March 2003 you received a second Page 11 counseling for your pattern of misconduct, and you were duly warned that a failure to take corrective action may result in your administrative separation.  However, on 10 April 2003, you received a third Page 11 for violating the conditions of the Commanding Officer’s “no contact” order which you had a duty to obey, and for breaking restriction and assaulting your spouse. 
 
On 29 April 2003, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct.  Ultimately, after waiving your right to an administrative separation board, on 9 May 2003 you were discharged from the Marine Corps with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.   
 
The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case in accordance with the Wilkie Memo.  These included, but were not limited to your contentions that:  (a) you were not treated fairly while serving in the Marine Corps; (b) issues in your marriage impacted your decisions and were not addressed correctly; (c) your record reflects a Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal; and (d) in 2019 the VA determined based on new evidence that your service was honorable.  However, based upon this review, the Board concluded that these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief. 
 
The Board did not believe that your record was otherwise so meritorious to deserve an upgrade.  Additionally, the Board determined that Marines should receive no higher discharge characterization than is due.  The Board concluded that significant negative aspects of your conduct and/or performance greatly outweighed any positive aspects of your military record.  The Board also noted that the record in your case clearly documents that you were the aggressor in each instance of domestic violence, and the Board determined that that your misconduct constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of a Marine.  Furthermore, the Board determined that the evidence of record did not demonstrate that you were not mentally responsible for your conduct or that you should not be held accountable for your actions.     
 
The Board also noted that there is no provision of federal law or in Navy/Marine Corps regulations that allows for a discharge to be automatically upgraded after a specified number of months or years.  Moreover, absent a material error or injustice, the Board generally will not summarily upgrade a discharge solely for the purpose of facilitating VA benefits, or enhancing educational or employment opportunities.  Lastly, the Board also noted that VA eligibility determinations for health care, disability compensation, and other VA-administered benefits are for internal VA purposes only.  Such VA eligibility determinations, disability ratings, and/or discharge classifications are not binding on the Department of the Navy and have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on previous active duty service discharge characterizations.  Accordingly, the Board determined that there was no impropriety or inequity in your discharge, and concluded that your serious misconduct merited your OTH discharge.  The Board carefully considered any matters submitted regarding your post-service conduct and accomplishments.  However, even in light of the Wilkie Memo and reviewing the record holistically, the Board still concluded that given the totality of the circumstances your request does not merit relief.   
 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon 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,