Docket No: 4396-20 
Ref: Signature Date 
                 
Dear : 
 
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 for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 27 October 1987.  During the period from 12 August 1988 to 14 June 1990, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for fighting, unauthorized absence (UA), disobeying a lawful order, and driving while intoxicated (DWI).  On 19 July 1990, the Station Medical Officer recommended you for Level III Alcohol Rehabilitation Treatment Program.  On 29 August 1990, you were released from Level III Alcohol Rehabilitation Treatment Program due to failure or refusal to participate in or successfully complete the Level III Alcohol Rehabilitation Treatment Program.  On 24 September 1990, you received an additional NJP for three specifications of absence from appointed place of duty, wrongfully destroying an official document, DWI, fleeing apprehension, and driving on revoked license.  On 5 October 1990, your commanding officer (CO) recommended you receive a general under honorable conditions discharge due to alcohol rehabilitation failure, and a RE-4 reenlistment code.  However, on 30 November 1990, you submitted a written request for discharge for the good of the service (GOS) to avoid trial by court-martial for two specifications of absence from appointed place of duty, wrongfully consuming alcohol while on restriction, driving on revoked license, and two specifications of breaking restriction.  Prior to submitting this request, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, at which time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.  Your request was granted and your commanding officer (CO) was directed to issue an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service.  As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction, as well as the potential penalties of such a punitive discharge.  On 17 December 1990, you were discharged. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and contention that your discharge was unfair and inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident out of 28 months of service with no adverse actions.  However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case given your misconduct and request for a GOS discharge in lieu of a trial by court-martial.   
 
In regard to your contention that your discharge was unfair and inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident our of 28 months of service with no adverse actions, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to your contention.  As detailed above, the record shows that prior to requesting a GOS discharge; you received four NJPs and were released from the Level III Alcohol Rehabilitation Treatment program due to failure or refusal to participate. 
     
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 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,