Docket No: 3483-19 
Ref: Signature Date 


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 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. 

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 7 May 2020.  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 enlisted in the Marine Corps on 9 November 1973.  On 14 June 1974, you received non­judicial punishment (NJP) for four specifications of assault and having a private act like a dog.  On 7 February 1977, you submitted a written request for discharge for the good of the service (GOS) to avoid trial by court-martial for an unauthorized absence of 507 days.  Prior to submitting this request, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, at which time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.  Your request was granted and your CO was directed to issue an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service.  As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction, as well as the potential penalties of such a punitive discharge.  On 9 February 1977, you were discharged. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as the documents you submitted with your application including a character letter and chaplain certificates, your desire to upgrade your discharge, and your contention that your wife was sick with a brain tumor and your leave request was denied. The Board also noted your contentions that you were an excellent Marine who drove for the general and a drill instructor, and you are now a chaplain. 

However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case given your misconduct and request for a GOS discharge in lieu of a trial by court-martial. In regard to your contention that your wife was sick with a brain tumor and your leave request was denied, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention.  In regard to your contentions that you were an excellent Marine who drove for the general and a drill instructor, the Board noted that a Marine’s service is characterized at the time of discharge based on performance during the current enlistment.  Regarding your contention that you are now a chaplain, 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 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.