Docket No: 7926-19 
Ref: Signature Date 

This 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 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 14 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, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant 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 13 July 1983. On 24 February 1984, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for drunk and disorderly conduct and were awarded forfeiture of pay, restriction, and extra duties.  On 21 September 1984, you were counseled for failing your physical fitness test.  On 25 September 1984 and 10 September 1985, you were counseled for failing to follow orders.  On 18 September 1985, you were counseled for lack of proficiency and advised that further deficiencies in performance or could result in administrative separation.  On 27 November 1985, you received a second NJP for disrespectful and profane language toward non commissioned officers and conduct unbecoming of a Marine. You were awarded forfeiture of pay, restriction, and reduction in rank. The reduction was suspended for six months.  You were again advised about the potential for administrative separation.  On 10 December 1985, you were counseled that you were eligible, but not recommended for promotion.  On 5 March 1986, the suspended portion of your previous NJP punishment was vacated.  On 1 April 1986, you received a third NJP for wrongful use of marijuana and were awarded forfeiture of pay, extra duties, and reduction in rank.  The extra duties were suspended for three months. 

On 2 April 1986, administrative discharge action was initiated due to a pattern of misconduct.  After being afforded all of your procedural rights, you waived them, and your case was forwarded to the separation authority for review.  Your commanding officer recommended that you be discharged with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization on service.  On 2 May 1986, you received a fourth NJP for assaulting a female Marine by striking her in the face with your fist and hitting her on the head with a bottle.  You were awarded a verbal reprimand and discharged with an OTH characterization of service. 

You request the Board upgrade your discharge.  You assert the reason you received an OTH discharge is that you did not want to reenlist.  You claim you never tested positive for marijuana use until you indicated that you did not want to reenlist, and that you were treated unjustly. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and contentions and concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in four NJPs, three of which occurred after you were warned about the potential for administrative separation.  The Board noted that you provided no evidence to support your contentions.  Absent 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.  Further, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for an upgrade in the characterization of service solely due 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.