DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 604-16 JAN 09 2017 Dear This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 22 September 2016. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 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 record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, Board regulations state that personal appearances before the Board are not granted as a right, but only when the Board determines that such an appearance will serve some useful purpose. In your case, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 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 on 17 April 1986 and served two years and six months without disciplinary incident. However, between 21 October 1988 and 8 July 1989, you received three nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for offenses including being absent from your appointed place of duty and two periods ofunauthorized absence (UA) totaling six days. During that same time frame, on 2 May 1989, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) for being drunk and disorderly. As a result ofthe foregoing misconduct, you were notified of proposed administrative separation action by reason ofmisconduct due to a pattern ofmisconduct. You elected to consult with legal counsel and requested to have your case presented to an administrative discharge board (ADB). The ADBfound you committed misconduct due to a pattern ofmisconduct, and recommended separation under other than honorable (OTH) conditions. The separation authority approved this recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason ofmisconduct. On 3 November 1989, you were so discharged. The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your desire to upgrade your discharge, and your contention you were discharged by an administrative discharge board and not a court-martial. Nevertheless, the Board found these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case given the seriousness ofyour pattern ofmisconduct. In this regard, the Board concluded the severity ofyour misconduct outweighed your reasons to upgrade your discharge and clearly supported the Commanding Officer's decision to process you for an OTH discharge, and the ADB's decision to recommend an OTH. Accordingly, your application has been denied. It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour 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