Docket No: 5954-19/6902-16/5025-13   
Ref: Signature date 
 
 
Dear : 
 
This letter is in reference to your reconsideration request we received on 12 June 2019.  You previously petitioned the Board and were advised that your applications had been disapproved.  Your case was reconsidered in accordance with Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Sec’y of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004).  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 
 
Because your application was submitted with new evidence not previously considered, the Board found it in the interest of justice to review your application.  Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-member panel, sitting in executive session on 22 July 2020.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  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. 
 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered the case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 17 February 1987.  Between 22 January 1988 and 1 November 1989, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions for offenses including failing to go to your appointed place of duty, two instances of disobedience, two instance of disrespect, wrongful use of provoking words, and assault.  After your first nonjudicial punishment, you were counseled that further misconduct could result in discharge.  On 22 August 1990, you were notified that you were being processed for administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions.  You requested, and participated in, an administrative discharge board.  The administrative board found that you committed misconduct and recommended that you be discharged with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge.  On 6 September 1990, the discharge authority directed an OTH character of service and on 19 October 1990, you were so discharged.     
 
In your current request for reconsideration, you contend that you did not receive your automatic upgrade to your discharge characterization.  You also assert that you were discharged due to family hardship instead of an OTH characterization and that you received a good conduct medal (GCM).  The Board noted that there is no provision that allows for an automatic upgrade of a discharge characterization solely due to the passage of time.  As for your assertion that you received a family hardship discharge and not an OTH discharge, your record clearly indicates that you received an OTH characterization of service due to misconduct.  In regards to the GCM, your record indicates that the GCM commencement date was reset at your second NJP.  The Box 18 Remark on your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) indicates the starting period of the GCM, not your entitlement to the award itself.  Accordingly, the Board did not find evidence of an error or injustice that warrants further upgrading your characterization of service. 
  
It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition 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 the absence of new matters for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 
 
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,