Docket No: 7157-19 
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 you did not file your application 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 for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 30 May 1985.  On 15 September 1986, you were counseled that you were eligible, but not recommended, for promotion to Lance Corporal (LCpl).   On 18 September 1986, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA).  You were also counseled regarding UA and dishonored checks, and advised that failure to take corrective action could result in administrative separation and judicial proceedings.  Between 15 October 1986 and 10 March 1987, you were counseled six additional times that you were eligible, but not recommended, for promotion to LCpl.  On 12 January 1987, you were again counseled for writing bad checks and warned about the potential for administrative separation.  On 22 February 1987, you received   NJP for UA.  On 1 June 1987, you received NJP for dishonored checks.  On 16 June 1987, you were warned again about the potential for administrative separation.  On 20 June 1987, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) for UA.  On 26 August 1987, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  After being afforded all of your procedural rights, you waived them, and your case was forwarded to the separation authority for review.  Your commanding officer recommended that you receive an under other than honorable conditions (OTH) discharge.  On 10 September 1987, the separation authority approved your separation and on 22 October 1987, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and contention that you requested permission to go ashore in  and it was granted even though you were on restriction.  When you returned to ship, you were arrested.  Additionally, you claim you were always aware of the error, but need it changed now to obtain benefits for your son.  The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in three NJPs and a SCM,   In regards to your contention that you were granted permission to leave ship, but charged anyway.  The Board noted that you were found not guilty of breaking restriction at your SCM; however, you were found guilty of other charges.  The Board discerned no error or injustice in 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 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,