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

Docket No: 9407-17 
Ref: Signature date

Dear	:

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, 
United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire 
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was 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 application on its merits. A three- 
member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 14 February 2019. 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, relevant 
portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 5 July 1985. On 12 May 
1988, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for assault. On 15 August 1988, you received 
NJP for an unauthorized absence. On 16 August 1988, you were counsel on your deficiencies in 
performance and conduct, you were further counseled that further involvement with NJP would 
result in a discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions. On 28 September 1988, you 
again received NJP for another period of unauthorized absence. Subsequently, you were notified 
of pending administrative separation action, with a potential OTH discharge, for pattern of 
misconduct and minor disciplinary infractions, at which time you waived your procedural rights, 
to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board 
(ADB).  Your commanding officer recommended an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct 
due to pattern of misconduct. He further noted due to your continued violations of rules and 
regulations you had been the subject of numerous personal and professional, unofficial and 
official counseling's, numerous punitive actions, and he noted you were afforded every 
opportunity within established Marine Corps policy to resolve your problems and correct your 
deficiencies.  The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an OTH
character of service discharge by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions. On 
1 February 1989, you were discharged.

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade 
your discharge. The Board considered your contentions that you had no idea you would receive 
an OTH character of service when you replied yes when asked if you wish to be discharged, you 
desire an upgrade of your character of service so that you may seek medical attention from the 
Department of Veterans Affairs due to chronic hearing loss which was incurred while on active 
duty, and you were not aware of the time line for when you could request an upgrade of your 
discharge.  Unfortunately, there is no provision of law or regulation that authorizes the upgrade 
of a discharge due to medical need.  Furthermore, during both your counseling and 
administrative separation processing, you acknowledged your separation could be with an OTH 
character of service. The Board concluded that your mitigating factors and contentions were not 
sufficient to warrant relief given the seriousness of your repeated misconduct. After a thorough 
review of the facts and circumstances unique to your case, the Board discerned no impropriety or 
inequity in the discharge action that would warrant a change in your characterization of service.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your 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 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,

5/1/2019


Executive Director