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

Docket No. 7209-19
Ref: Signature date 

Dear

This letter is in reference to your application 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 3 February 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, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determine a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 26 October 1989.  On 24 June 1991, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that continued until you surrendered on 17 July 1991.  On 23 July 1991, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for UA and you were awarded restriction, reduction in rank, and suspended forfeitures of pay.  On 6 August 1991, the suspended portion of your NJP punishment was vacated and you were advised of your rights because you were suspected of wrongful use of a controlled substance.  On 16 August 1991, you began another period of UA that continued until you were apprehended by civilian authorities on 6 February 1992. On 30 March 1992, in accordance with your pleas of guilty, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) for violating Articles 86 (UA), 112a (wrongful use of a controlled substance – cocaine), and 134 (breaking restriction) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  You were awarded forfeitures of pay for two months, confinement for 70 days, reduction in rank to E-1, and to be discharged from the naval service with a bad-conduct discharge (BCD).  On 9 April 1992, you were granted appellate leave.  On 6 October 1992, your request for restoration and clemency was denied.  On 31 August 1994, appellate review was completed.  On 12 September 1994, you were discharged with a BCD. 

You request the Board upgrade your discharge to honorable.  You assert a BCD was harsh based on your situation at the time.  You state that you joined the Marines to make your father proud.  Three weeks after graduating boot camp your father was murdered, and you were only given five days to go home and bury him.  After your father’s death, your mother struggled to care for your three siblings and fell ill.  You claim you requested a hardship transfer, but felt as if no one cared, so you followed the advice of a staff sergeant to go UA.  You contend that you were not a “bad” Marine, just going through a difficult time.  Lastly, you state that you have been a law abiding productive citizen since your discharge and now that you are older, you want the opportunity to have your discharge upgraded.
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and contentions, and concluded these factors were insufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct of 198 days of UA and drug abuse.  The Board noted that you provided no evidence to support your contentions of a request for a hardship transfer or of an unidentified staff sergeant advising you to go UA.  Absent of such evidence, the Board relied upon the presumption of regularity and presumed that the officials acted in accordance with governing law/policy and in good faith.  The Board noted your post-service accomplishments; however, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of time.
 
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. 

Sincerely,