Docket No: 4660-19 
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 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 9 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, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their 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 enlisted in the Marine Corps on 29 July 1987.  During the period from 8 February to 4 May 1988, you received two non-judicial punishments (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of duty and sleeping on post.  On 28 September 1988, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of assault, disobeying a lawful order, and drunk and disorderly conduct.  On 3 February 1989, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two specifications of disobeying a lawful order, assault, two specifications of using provoking words toward a non­commissioned officer (NCO) and drunk and disorderly conduct.  You were sentenced to 45 days extra duty and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).  After the BCD was approved at all levels of review, on 3 August 1990, you were discharged. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and contentions that your service has been deemed other than honorable for 30 years, you need a general discharge in order to take advantage of alcohol related therapy and counseling, and you have been a model citizen for 30 years.  However, the Board concluded that your misconduct, SCM and SPCM conviction outweighed your desire upgrade your discharge. 

Regarding your contention that your service has been deemed other than honorable for 30 years, the Board noted that there is no provision in law or regulations that allows for re-characterization of a discharge automatically after 30 years, due solely to the passage of time.  Regarding your contention that you need a general discharge in order to take advantage of alcohol related therapy and counseling, whether or not you are eligible for benefits is a matter under the cognizance of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and you should contact the nearest office of the VA concerning your right to apply for benefits.  If you have been denied benefits, you should appeal that denial under procedures established by the VA.  Regarding your contention that you have been a model citizen for 30 years, the Board noted while commendable, your post service conduct does not fully mitigate 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.