DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Dear , This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code. After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted 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 case on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2021. 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions contained in Medical/Psychiatric Advisor CORB letter 1910 CORB: 002 of 11 February 2021 and Director CORB letter 1910 CORB: 001 of 4 March 2021 along with your response to the opinions. A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in May 1996. Between June 1997 and March 1998, non-judicial punishment was imposed on you three times for unauthorized absence, disrespect, and multiple orders violations. In addition, you received several counselings due to personal conduct and your military bearing. As a result, you were notified of administrative separation processing for pattern of misconduct on 30 March 1998. However, while pending separation, non-judicial punishment was again imposed on you for incidents of unauthorized absence and disrespect on 24 July 1998. You were eventually discharged on 27 August 1998 with an Other than Honorable characterization of service after being medically cleared to be separated. Post-discharge, Department of Veteran Affairs records indicate you started to lose visual acuity in your left eye that has since progressed to blindness. Records also show you suffered from a syncope episode in 2007. The Board carefully considered your arguments for an upgrade to your characterization of service. You allege that you were discharged based on your medical issues and not misconduct. In addition, you assert that you should not have received an Other than Honorable characterization of service due to your medical issues. You claim to have suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and anxiety based on your eye condition that was exacerbated by an incident when a superior placed his finger in your eye. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. In reviewing your record, the Board determined that you were appropriately discharged for pattern of misconduct based on your history of misconduct that included four non-judicial punishments. While you argue in your rebuttal that you were never charged with any crime or court-martialed, the Board found sufficient evidence that you committed misconduct based on the multiple documented incidents of non-judicial punishment in your record. The Board was also not persuaded by your argument that your eye condition should have formed the basis for your discharge instead of misconduct. Military disability regulations direct that misconduct based discharge processing shall supersede disability processing when an Other than Honorable characterization of service is authorized. Based on the existing regulations, the Board concluded that the Marine Corps properly prioritized your pattern of misconduct discharge processing over any potential disability processing. Further, the Board agreed with the advisory opinion that there was insufficient evidence that your left eye condition was unfitting at the time of your discharge. In making this finding, the Board relied on the 26 August 1998 separation physical that noted that you were taking eye drops for your glaucoma but still cleared you for separation. In the Board’s opinion, despite your left eye condition, this was strong evidence that you were still fit for active duty at the time of your discharge for misconduct. The Board also noted that you were never diagnosed with any mental health conditions while in the military and no evidence was found that you suffered any occupational impairment as a result of a mental health condition. Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. 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, 8/21/2021 Deputy Director