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 26 March 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).   
 
The Board determined that your personal appearance, with or without counsel, would 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. 
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 15 September 2008.  Your pre-service enlistment physical and medical history noted no psychological or neurological conditions or symptoms. 
 
On 13 February 2009 you commenced a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that terminated after nine days on 22 February 2009.  On 23 February 2009 you participated in a urinalysis test.  On 5 March 2009 the Navy Drug Laboratory in San Diego notified your command that your urinalysis sample tested positive for both dextroamphetamine and THC (marijuana).  On 11 March 2009 your command issued you a “Page 11” counseling warning (Page 11) documenting your nine-day UA.  You did not make a Page 11 rebuttal statement. 
 
On 11 March 2009 you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for two separate specifications of the wrongful use of a controlled substance (dextroamphetamine and marijuana, respectively).  You did not appeal your NJP.  Following the NJP you were issued a Page 11 warning documenting your drug abuse and advising you that processing for administrative separation is mandatory for drug abuse. 
 
On 20 March 2009 you were notified that you were being processed for an administrative discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug use.  You waived in writing your rights to consult with counsel, submit written rebuttal statements, and to present your case to an administrative separation board.  Ultimately, on 27 April 2009 you were separated from the Marine Corps with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service and received an RE-4B reentry code.   
 
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) your discharge is unjust because you made a one-time mistake; (b) unfortunately you got involved with the wrong Marines and made a wrong decision that will never happen again; (c) you have earned an Associates’ degree and have begun working on your Bachelors’ degree at the University of ; (d) you hope to have your discharge code changed to allow you to enlist in the Army Reserve; (e) you have enjoyed post-service career success at Discover Card; and (f) you sincerely regret your mistake.  However, based upon this review, the Board concluded that these potentially mitigating factors were not persuasive and were insufficient to warrant relief. 
 
The Board did not believe that your record was otherwise so meritorious to deserve a discharge upgrade or change in your reentry code, and the Board determined that Marines should receive no higher discharge characterization and reentry code 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 during your brief military service.  The Board noted that characterization under OTH conditions is generally warranted for misconduct and is appropriate when the basis for separation is the commission of an act or acts constituting a significant departure from the conduct expected of a Marine.  The Board determined the record clearly reflected that your misconduct was intentional and demonstrated that you were unfit for further service.  Furthermore, the Board also determined that the evidence of record did not demonstrate you were not mentally responsible for your conduct or that you should not be held accountable for your actions.     
 
Additionally, 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 or change a reentry code solely for the purpose of facilitating VA benefits, or enhancing educational or employment opportunities, including military enlistment.  Accordingly, the Board concluded that you received the correct discharge characterization and reentry code based on your overall circumstances and that such discharge and reentry code were in accordance with all DoN directives and policy at the time of your 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,