Docket No: 2760-19
Ref: Signature Date 



This is in reference to your application of 23 February 2019 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 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 application on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 30 September 1968.  During the period from 1 May to 22 October 1969, you received three non-judicial punishments (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA) for one day and two specifications of failure to obey a lawful order.  Subsequently, you were notified of an administrative action to separate you from the naval service for unfitness due to marijuana use.  You elected to consult with legal counsel and subsequently requested an administrative discharge board (ADB).  The ADB recommended retention for further service in the Marine Corps.  The Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) did not concur with the ADB and recommended a general discharge under honorable conditions by reason of unfitness due to marijuana use.  The discharge authority concurred with SJA’s recommendation and directed a general under honorable conditions discharge by reason of unfitness.  On 28 July 1970, you were so discharged. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your desire to upgrade your discharge, contentions that while on active duty, you received a Good Conduct Medal and the Navy Accommodation Medal after serving two tours in Vietnam and Guantanamo Bay Cuba.  The Board also noted your contentions that you never understood why you were being discharged and you did not understand the difference between an honorable and general discharge.  

Regarding your contentions that while on active duty, you received a Good Conduct medal and the Navy Accommodation Medal after serving two tours in the Board noted that a Marine’s service is characterized at the time of discharge based on performance during the current enlistment.  Regarding your contention that you never understood why you were being discharged and you did not understand the difference between an honorable and general discharge.  The Board noted that the record contains documented evidence, which is contrary to your contention.  The record shows that 8 July 1970, you made a written statement in which you stated that you did not feel you deserved an undesirable discharge and you would like to receive a general under honorable conditions discharge. The Board concluded that there was no probable material error or injustice in your discharge. 

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. 

2