DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 300-16 
JAN 13 2017 

Dear :
 
This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 10 ofthe United States Code, section 1552. 

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 threemember 
panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 11 October 2016. The names and votes ofthe members of the panel 
will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror 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 ofyour application, together with all 
material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and 
policies. 

After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence 
submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 25 April 1990. On 
26 November 1991, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use ofmarijuana. On 
1 July 1992 you failed the level three alcohol rehabilitation program. Subsequently, on 11 July 
1992, you were notified ofpending administrative separation action by reason ofmisconduct due to 
drug abuse and level three rehabilitation failure. After you waived your procedural rights, your 
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of 
misconduct due to drug abuse. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed 
separation under other than honorable conditions by reason ofmisconduct. On 28 August 1992, you 
were so discharged. 

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors, such as charter letters, counsel brief, post service conduct, your desire to upgrade 
your discharge, change separation code, and assertions that stress from combat deployments caused 
you to drink and use marijuana and you failed level three rehabilitation program due to being in a 
car accident. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief 
in your case given your misconduct. In this regard, the Board concluded that the severity of your 
drug abuse, which resulted in NJP, outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge and change 
your separation code. The Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted 
none, to support your assertions ofsuffering from stress due to combat deployments and being in a 
car accident. The Board also noted that Character ofservice is based, in part, on conduct and 
overall trait averages which are computed from marks assigned during periodic evaluations. Your 
conduct average was 3.9. An average of4.0 in conduct was required at the time ofyour separation 
for a fully honorable characterization ofservice. Finally, your separation code was based, in part, 
on your narrative reason for separation "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)," at the time ofyour separation 
from the Martine Corps. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

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 submission ofnew and material 
evidence within one year from the date ofthe Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not 
previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. In this regard, it is 
important to keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity attaches to all official records. 
Consequently, when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the burden is on the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director