DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 2145-16 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 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 threemember 
panel ofthe Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 3 January 2017. The names and votes ofthe members of the 
panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror 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. 

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period ofactive duty on 5 August 1985. During 
the period from 15 July 1986 to 15 December 1987, you received six nonjudicial punishments 
(NJP) for two specifications of failure to go to your appointed place ofduty, two specifications 
ofbeing absent from your appointed place of duty, writing bad checks, making a false official 
statement, and wrongful use ofmarijuana. Subsequently, you were notified ofpending 
administrative separation action by reason ofmisconduct due a pattern ofmisconduct and drug 
abuse. After you waived your procedural rights, your commanding officer recommended an 
other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason ofmisconduct due to a pattern ofmisconduct 
and drug abuse. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation 
under other than honorable conditions by reason ofmisconduct. On 9 February 1988, you were 
so discharged. 

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. 
The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors, such as your letter from dated 19 June 2014, your 
desire to upgrade your discharge and assertion that you were diagnosed with depression while on 
active duty and were not offered treatment which lead to your misconduct. The Board concluded 
that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case given your misconduct and 
drug abuse. In this regard, the Board concluded the severity ofyour misconduct and drug abuse, 
which resulted in six NJPs and drug abuse, outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge. 
The Board also noted that the record clearly shows that on 2 March 1987, you received a 
psychological evaluation that determined you were experiencing situational anxiety and 
depression due to your pending discharge and pending birth ofa child. That your condition 
neither exhibited or demonstrated psychosis or disabling neurosis and that you were 
psychiatrically fit for discharge. Finally, the Board noted that on 26 January 1988, you received 
a discharge physical in which you stated that you were in good health other than having sinus 
problems. In the end, the Board determined that your discharge was not based on your assertions 
ofdepression and not being offered treatment resulted to your misconduct and drug abuse and 
was based on your misconduct and drug abuse. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are such that favorable action cannot be taken 
at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of 
new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. 
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 of an official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director