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

Docket No: 7561-18              
Ref: Signature Date 

Dear :
 
This letter is in reference to your application of 3 September 2018 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 that 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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 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 16 November 1984.  On 30 December 1985, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of being disrespectful in language, willfully disobeying a lawful order, and damaging government property. During the period from 1 August 1986 to 25 February 1987, you received three non-judicial punishments (NJP) for three specifications of failure to obey a lawful regulation, damage to property belonging to another Marine, two specifications of failure to go at the prescribed time to your appointed place of duty, and failure to obey a lawful general order.  Subsequently, you were notified of an administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  After you waived your rights, your commanding officer (CO) recommended discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  The discharge authority approved this recommendation, and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct.  On 2 April 1987, you were so discharged. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and contentions that all your misconduct occurred off-duty as a result of underage drinking, and you always performed your duties as expected.  In this regard, the Board concluded that the seriousness of your misconduct outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge.  Regarding your contention that all your misconduct occurred off-duty as a result of underage drinking, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contentions.  The Board also noted that the record shows that you were notified of and waived your right to present your case to an administrative board (ADB). In doing so, you gave up your first and best opportunity to advocate for retention or a more favorable characterization of service. In regard to your contention that you always performed your duties as expected, the Board noted that a Marine’s service is characterized at the time of discharge based on performance during the current enlistment. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken.  You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or 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, 


10/17/2019