DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 2014-16 

Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of title 10 ofthe United States Code, section 1552. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of 
justice to waive the statute oflimitations and consider your application on its merits. A .three
member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 10 February 2017. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 
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 ofthis 
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, 
regulations, and policies. 

After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence 
submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period ofactive duty on 11 June 1992. On 
6 May 1993, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to your appointed place 
of duty and failure to obey and order or regulation. On 18 May 1993, the 
Podiatry Outpatient Board referred you to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for further 
adjudication ofyour diagnosis ofrecurrent right ankle inversion strains, subluxation, peroneal 
tendons. At the time ofyour referral, you were not pending any disCiplinary action or 
administrative separation. However, on 22 June and 27 July 1993, you received NJP for failure 
to go to your appointed place ofduty, attempt to enter a building by removing a window screen, 
unauthorized absence, and breaking restriction. Prior to each ofyour NJPs, you were advised of 
your right to consult counsel, but elected not to consult counsel, Additionally, you did not refuse 
NJP and demand trial by court-martial, and you accepted NJP, subject to your right ofappeal. In 
view ofthe foregoing misconduct, the PEB process was terminated and administrative separation 
action was initiated, at which time you waived your right to consult with counsel and to present 
your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). After being afforded all of your 
procedural rights, your Commanding Officer forwarded your case, recommending an other than 
honorable (OTH) discharge by reason ofmisconduct. On 1November1993, the separation 
authority directed an OTH discharge, and on 4 November 1993, you were so discharged. 

The Board, in its review ofyour application, carefully considered your desire to be granted a 
medical discharge, to have your NJPs removed from your record and to restore your paygrade to 
E-3 and forfeiture ofpay awarded at NJP. The Board considered your contentions that (1) you 
were injured while in the Marine Corps and were approved for a medical discharge, (2) that you 
were intimidated into accepting all three ofyour NJPs and were told not to question or comment 
on them, and (3) that removing one or more ofthe NJPs would change the "pattern of 
misconduct" narrative reason and allow for a General or Honorable characterization ofservice. 
The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization ofyour 
discharge, given the seriousness ofyour misconduct which resulted in three NJPs. With regard 
to your contention that you were approved for a medical discharge, per Marine Corps policy, 
when administrative separation proceedings for misconduct or disciplinary proceedings which 
could result in a punitive discharge have been initiated, and disability evaluation proceedings are 
being run concurrently, the former takes precedence. Therefore, your PEB process was properly 
terminated prior to approval of a medical discharge, and you were instead processed for 
administrative separation. With regard to your contention that you were intimidated into 
accepting all three ofyour NJPs, the Board noted that you were afforded an opportunity to 
consult counsel and understood your rights prior to each NJP. With regard to your contention 
that removing one or more ofthe NJPs would change the "pattern ofmisconduct" narrative 
reason for discharge, the Board noted that per Marine Corps policy, a minimum oftwo incidents 
occurring within one enlistment would qualify for a "pattern ofmisconduct." Your record 
reflects six violations ofthe Uniform Code ofMilitary Justice. Thus, the "misconduct-pattern" 
narrative reason for discharge is appropriate. Finally, the Board noted that you waived your 
procedural right to present your case to an ADB. In doing so, you gave up your best opportunity 
to advocate for retention or a more favorable characterization ofservice. Accordingly, your 
application has been denied. 

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 ofnew and material 
evidence within one year from the date ofthe Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not 
previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. In this regard, it is 
important to keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity attaches to all official records. 
Consequently, when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the burden is on the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director