Docket No:  4624-19 
Ref: Signature date 
 

Dear  
 
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 30 June 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 and began a period of active duty on 26 June 1985.  On 16 January 1986, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for 15 hours of unauthorized absence.  On 16 April 1986, you were counseled for a lackadaisical attitude.  On 30 April 1986, you were counseled for failure to be at your appointed place of duty and substandard performance.  On 1 August 1986, you were counseled for writing bad checks.  On 10 December 1987, you were counseled for frequent involvement with military authorities and alcohol dependence.  On 10 December 1987, you received NJP for two instances of failure to report to your appointed place of duty.  On 12 February 1988, you received NJP for violation of an order and six days of unauthorized absence.  On 28 April 1988, you requested separation in lieu of trial by court-martial (SILT).  Your battalion commanding officer recommended approval of the SILT.  Subsequently, the staff judge advocate to the convening authority found the package legally sufficient and recommended approval.  The convening authority approved the SILT and you received an OTH discharge on 10 April 1988. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and your assertions that if you had it to do over, you would have done it differently, and you are sorry for your behavior.  The Board also considered your assertions that alcohol got the better of you, and an upgrade would help you to help others.  The Board commends your desire to help others who are facing addiction; however, based on the evidence available, the Board concluded that these factors and assertions were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in three NJPs and an approved SILT, which you requested.  The Board noted you waived your procedural rights in connection with a court-martial and administrative separation.  By doing so, you gave up your first, and best, opportunity to force the Marine Corps to prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt or advocate for retention or a more favorable characterization of service.  The Board found no evidence of error that requires correction to the characterization of your service and concluded that your discharge was properly issued.  
 
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,