DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 0341-18 Ref: Signature date This letter 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 for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. Although you did not file your application 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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 March 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, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You reenlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 26 November 1984. On 21 June 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violating Article 107 (False Official Statement) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). On 21 October 1985, you were counseled that you were ineligible for promotion to Corporal due to frequent involvement with civilian authorities. On 5 November 1985, you were counseled for writing bad checks, making false official statements, and your frequent involvement with civilian authorities. You were advised that any further disciplinary infractions or continuation of deficient performance could result in administrative separation under other than honorable (OTH) conditions. On 6 January 1986, you received a second NJP for violating Article 121 (Larceny x 2) of the UCMJ. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of your pattern of misconduct. On 2 June 1986, you received an OTH discharge due to pattern of misconduct. In your application you requested your characterization of service be upgraded and that the narrative reason for your separation be changed. You asserted that because block 18 (Remarks) on your DD Form 214 reads, in part: “Good Conduct Medal period commences: ,” it is an error that your narrative reason for separation is pattern of misconduct. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, including your record of service and your contentions that your characterization of service has caused you employment hardship. The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct which resulted in two NJPs. With regard to your contention the Good Conduct Medal entry, the notation on your DD Form 214 does not indicate that you received a good conduct medal (GCM), but rather it documents the starting date for the next period for that award. The GCM is awarded to any active duty enlisted member who completes three consecutive years of honorable service without any NJP, disciplinary infractions, or court-martial offenses. If a service member commits an offense, the three-year mark resets and a service member must perform an additional three years of service without having to be disciplined. Consequently, your GCM period commenced on 6 January 1986, the date of your last NJP. Regrettably, 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 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, 6/4/2019