Docket No: 9074-19/ 
           8834-07                                                                                        
Ref: Signature Date 
 

Dear   
 
This letter is in reference to your reconsideration request dated 18 September 2019.  You previously petitioned the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) and were advised that your application had been disapproved.  Your case was reconsidered in accordance with 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.  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session on 30 September 2020, has carefully examined your current request.  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 and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
You presented as evidence a personal statement.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board determined that the documentation that you provided, even though not previously considered by the Board, was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.   
 
In regard to your contention that you did not have a pattern of misconduct, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to your contention.  The record clearly shows that between the periods from 1 June 1983 to 11 September 1984, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) on three separate occasions.  The Board also noted that the record shows that you were notified of, and waived your right to, present your case to an administrative board (ADB).  In doing so, you gave up your first and best opportunity to advocate for retention or a more favorable characterization of service.  In regard to your contention that you were young and made bad choices, the Board noted that the evidence of record did not show that you were not responsible for your conduct or that you should not be held accountable for your actions.  
 
In regard to your contention that you turned your life around by becoming a pastor in the Salvation Army, the Board noted that, while commendable, your post service conduct does not excuse your conduct while enlisted in the Marine Corps or the basis for your discharge.  Regarding your contention that it has been 35 years since your discharge, the Board noted that there is no provision in law or regulations that allows for re-characterization of a discharge automatically after 35 years, due solely to the passage of time. 
   
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,