Docket No: 3162-19/ 
            2696-11  
Ref: Signature Date 
     
  
Dear  : 
 
This letter is in reference to your reconsideration request received on 18 March 2019.  You previously petitioned the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) and were advised that your application had been disapproved.  Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Sec’y of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004).  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 
 
Because your application was submitted with a new statement that was not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your most recent application.  In this regard, your current request was carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, on 10 July 2020.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, available portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 3 April 1990.  On 11 May 1992, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for conspiracy, false official statement, operating a motor vehicle in a reckless manner, and using provoking words.  On 18 May 1992, you were counseled due to deficiencies in your performance and conduct as evidenced by your NJP.  On 9 September 1992, you received NJP for wrongfully possessing a false military identification card.  On 13 October 1992, you were counseled for an alcohol-related incident due to receiving two driving under the influence (DUI) citations from the civilian community within a 16-day period while on a three-year probation for a May 1991 DUI.  On 9 November 1992, you received a third NJP for a four-day unauthorized absence and disobeying a lawful order. 
 
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of minor disciplinary infractions and a pattern of misconduct.  After you waived your procedural rights, your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.  On 29 January 1993, you were discharged. 
 
The previous Board considered your request for an upgraded characterization of service.  Your current application requests reconsideration and again seeks an upgrade to your characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  The Board considered your request to upgrade your characterization in light of your contention that you were not the individual driving your vehicle during either of the two DUI incidents in 1992.  Further, the Board considered your contention that you drank in order to “get away from the bad thoughts” that stemmed from being sexually abused as a child.  The Board also considered your contention that you never used the false identification card.  Lastly, you contend Staff Sergeant (SSgt) H_ “did not like me because I was white” and this “led to an array of problems for me as he tried to charge me with anything that had gone wrong in our battalion regardless of whether or not I was present.”  You further contend that SSgt H_ charged you with UA despite the fact you had “been released by another sergeant” and charged you with saying “racial epithets towards another Marine.” 
 
The Board noted you did not provide any additional documentation to support your contentions that your alcohol-related incidents were an attempt to “get away from the bad thoughts” and determined there was insufficient evidence in your record to support your contention.  Even liberally considering your contentions, the Board did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants upgrading your characterization of service. 
 
It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition 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 the absence of new matters for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 
 
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,