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

Docket No: 3892-19 
Ref: Signature Date 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application of 29 March 2019 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 21 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, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 15 August 1968.  On 5 June 1969, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for sleeping on post.  On 30 May 1972, you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of wrongfully and knowingly have in your possession 175 tablets of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD) and wrongfully and knowingly distribute 60 tablets of LSD.  As punishment, you were awarded confinement, reduction in rank, forfeiture of pay and discharge from the naval service with a dishonorable discharge (DD).  On 27 December 1972, the convening authority approved only so much of the sentence that provided for a bad conduct discharge (BCD), confinement, forfeiture of pay and reduction in rank.  After final review, on 15 October 1973, the sentence to BCD, confinement, forfeiture of pay and reduction in rank was approved and executed.  On 19 October 1973, you were discharged.

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your desire to upgrade your discharge.  The Board considered your contention that you were discharged because of being on drugs, you have not been on drugs since your discharge from the military, you were young when you committed the offense. The Board also considered your contentions that when you became a civilian, you turned your life around, you have been married for 37 years, you have put your children through college, have had a steady career with  Company for 37 years, and have stayed in a church community.  

The Board has no authority to set aside a court-martial conviction and must limit its review to determining whether the sentence should be modified as a matter of clemency.  Your request was fully and carefully considered by the Board in light of the Secretary of Defense’s 25 July 2018 memorandum, “Guidance to Military Discharge Review boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations.”  The Board determined that no clemency is warranted in your case.  In this regard, the Board considered your contention and commends you for your post service conduct, however, concluded that there was insufficient evidence to warrant clemency given the severity of your misconduct that resulted in a BCD.  In its review, the Board discerned no material error or injustice in your discharge, nor did it find that clemency was warranted.
 
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,