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 the provisions of title l 0 of the 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 of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three­member panel of the Board for Correction of aval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 June 2017. The names and votes ofthe 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 ofyour application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies, and the Advisory Opinion (AO) from the Bureau ofNaval Medicine dated 12 April 2017, a copy of which was provided to you on 19 April 2017. 

You reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 14 April 1985, after over three years ofsatisfactory service. Medical records from 27 August 1984 and 30 August 1984, document a head injury and indicate that you were involved in a Jeep collision that resulted in significant pain in your neck. On 21 May 1986, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for larceny. On 14 July 1986, you received a second NJP for unauthorized absence (UA). On 20 January 1987, you received a third NIP for a second period of UA. On 17 March 1987, your Commanding Officer recommended that you be administratively separated based on various minor infractions. The Commanding Officer's recommendation notes that you received 10 counselings on separate occasions and three office hours for infractions ranging from U A to theft. The staffjudge advocate reviewed the recommendation and on 2 April 1987, found the separation proceedings sufficient in law and in fact. You were discharged from the Marine Corps on 17 April 1987, with an other than honorable characterization ofservice. 
After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material or injustice. The Board carefully weighed your desire to upgrade your discharge and the potentially mitigating factors of your head injury. In consideration of the AO and in light ofthe types of misconduct in which you engaged during your time in the Marine Corps, the Board found that the other than 
honorable discharge was appropriate and that an upgrade is not warranted due to either error or injustice. 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. ln 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 of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director