DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
             
Docket No: 0882-19  
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 23 January 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 a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to its understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined 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 24 January 1983.  On 29 January 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use of controlled substance.  On 3 May 1985, you received a second NJP for wrongful use of a controlled substance.  Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  After consulting counsel and waiving your procedural rights, your commanding officer (CO) recommended that you be discharged by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed your OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.  On 26 June 1985, you were discharged. 

The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contention that your OTH discharge is inequitable and has served its purpose. 

Specifically, you contend that the underlying basis of your separation was procedurally defective at the time of discharge because it was a “hasty command-initiated request for separation.” You further contend that you were “young and impressionable” and your “command did not reach out to find out if there was any way that they could help guide” you.  The Board also considered your contention that the CO did not provide “reasonable time to overcome deficiencies” as required and he “rushed to judgment” by determining “there was a problem that could not be fixed.” You further contend that you still had the ability to perform your duties and “there was never any substantiated finding of an inability to be productive.” 

Additionally, the Board considered your contention that the “OTH is inequitable now” and “does not serve a further purpose.” In support of your request for an upgrade, you submitted numerous advocacy letters attesting to your post-service accomplishments and numerous letters of recognition for your post-service career. 

Lastly, the Board considered your explanation that while stationed at                          , you had a civilian, college-aged girlfriend, and you attended parties and frequented bars together.  You confessed to smoking marijuana a “couple times” but stated you “never carried or possessed it.” The Board also considered your contention that you “attended ADAP classes but never underwent intensive rehabilitation,” were never offered legal advice, and “didn’t feel the process was very fair.” You simply stated you “had poor decision-making skills while trying to ‘act cool’ in front of girls.” 

Unfortunately, after careful consideration of your above contentions and careful review of the advocacy letters submitted on your behalf, the Board did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants upgrading your characterization of service. Based on your drug-related misconduct, the Board determined you were assigned an appropriate characterization of service. Even under the liberal consideration standard, the Board found your misconduct warranted an OTH characterization of service. 

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, 


2/17/2020