Docket No: 4813-20 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 25 November 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. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issue(s) involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 30 November 1987. During the period from 11 July 1989 to 25 September 1989, you received two non-judicial punishments (NJP) for two specifications of failure to go at prescribe time to appointed place of duty, two specifications of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 24 days and absence from appointed place of duty. On 18 December 1989, you submitted a written request for discharge for the good of the service (GOS) to avoid trial by court-martial for being in a UA status from 29 September 1989 to 17 November 1989 totaling 50 days. 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 12 January 1990, you were discharged. d all potentially mitigating factors, such as your Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) application, your medical information from , your desire to upgrade your discharge, contentions that you injured your back while in the Marine Corps and never received x-rays to determine what was wrong. The Board noted your contentions that: (a) you asked for proper treatment and doctors said you had pulled a muscle; (b) you went UA because you could not get help with your back; (c) you received an x-ray while in the brig, but it was in the wrong place and the brig refused to redo the x-ray; (d) you were advised to request a GOS discharge by your lawyer; (e) you later found out your back was broken and did not heal properly; and (f) you did not receive any disciplinary actions while in the Marine Corps, and since discharge you have been an upstanding citizen, loving husband and father. In regard to your contentions regarding your back injury, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support these contentions. In regard to your contention that while in the Marine Corps, you did not receive any disciplinary actions, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to your contention. Regarding your contention that since discharge, you have been an upstanding citizen, loving husband and father, the Board noted while commendable, your post-service conduct does not excuse your conduct while enlisted in the Marine Corps or the basis for your discharge. In reviewing the circumstances of your separation and characterization of service, the Board considered the totality of the circumstances to determine whether relief is appropriate today in the interests of justice in accordance with guidance provided by the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Wilkie Memo of 25 July 2018). Accordingly, the Board considered and acknowledged your positive contributions to the Marine Corps, the length of your active duty service to our nation, and your post-discharge achievements. In reviewing your separation and characterization of service, the Board considered the totality of the circumstances to determine whether relief is appropriate today in the interests of justice in accordance with guidance provided by the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Wilkie Memo of 25 July 2018). However, even in light of the USD Memo, the Board still concluded given the totality of the circumstances, your request does not merit relief. 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,