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

 
Docket No: 554-18/ 
14217-90 
Ref: Signature date 


Dear  :

This is in reference to your latest reconsideration request dated 11 January 2018. You previously 
petitioned the Board and were advised in our letter that your applications had been disapproved. 
Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board of Correction of Naval Records procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Secretary of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. 

Because your application was submitted with new evidence not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your application. Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session on 26 March 2019. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel would not materially add to its understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

You presented as evidence a personal statement, character letters, and certificates from     College and   College.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined that the documentation that you provided, even though not previously considered by the Board, was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. 

Regarding your contention that your discharge was inequitable, unjust, and erroneous because it 
was the result of a fight, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence that is 
contrary to your contention. The naval record indicates that you were convicted of misconduct 
by two separate special courts-martial on 20 January 1988 and 25 May 1988, and that your 
second court-martial sentence included that you be discharged from the naval service with a bad 
conduct discharge. The Board also noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you 
submitted none, to support your contention that your discharge was inequitable, unjust, or 
erroneous. 

Regarding your contention that you were told that you would be able to join another branch of 
the military, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to 
support your contention. Regarding your contention that you were told your discharge would be 
automatically upgraded, the Board noted there is no provision in law or regulations that allows 
for re-characterization of a discharge automatically, due solely to the passage of time. 

Regarding your contention that you are now a father of four and graduated from two different 
colleges, the Board noted while commendable, your post-service conduct does not excuse your 
conduct while enlisted in the Marine Corps or the basis for your discharge. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable 
action cannot be taken again. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon 
submission of new matters. New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by 
the Board. In the absence of sufficient new matters for reconsideration, the decision of the Board 
is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of 
appropriate jurisdiction. 

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, 

6/17/2019