Docket No: 3685-20
Ref: Signature Date                                             
  

Dear  :  
 
This letter is in reference to your reconsideration request.  You previously petitioned the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) and were advised that your application had been denied.  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 relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the 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 for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 November 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, to include the 25 July 2018 Under Secretary of Defense Memo on Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military / Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations.  
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 29 May 1967.  On 19 June 1968, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for communicating a threat, failure to obey a lawful order, and being disrespectful in language.  On 11 July 1968, you received NJP for breaking restriction.  On 24 April 1969, you received NJP for two unauthorized absences (UA) and failure to obey a lawful order.  On 5 January 1970, you received NJP for failure to obey a lawful order.  On 27 July 1970, you were found guilty at summary court-martial for wrongful use of marijuana and disobeying a lawful order by not mustering with the Battalion Duty Officer.    You were found guilty at special court-martial in January 1971, for attempting to steal US currency of a value of $11, the property of a captain.  The Court sentenced you to confinement at hard labor for three months, forfeiture of $80 pay per month for three months, and a bad conduct discharge.  On 4 February 1972, you were discharged from the Marine Corps on the basis of the sentence of the court-martial and received a reentry (RE) code of RE-4.   
 
In your application for correction, you request an upgrade to your bad conduct discharge characterization, a change from RE-4 to RE-1, and a change to narrative reason “for convenience of the government.”  You state that your discharge was unfair at the time, is procedurally defective, and unfair now.  You contend that you should have received clemency in this case and did not. 
 
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, including your contention that the discharge was unfair at the time, is unfair now, and clemency was and is warranted.  The Board noted that your record reflects four NJPs, one summary court-martial conviction, and a special court-martial conviction.  The Board also noted that your court-martial conviction of January 1971, was reviewed by the US Navy Court of Military Review and the findings of guilty and the sentenced were affirmed on 29 July 1971.  The Board found that you did not provide sufficient information to overcome the information reflected in your record and establish that your discharge was issued in error or was unjust.  The Board found that the special court-martial conviction was a sufficient basis for your discharge and that your characterization of service, narrative reason for separation, and RE-4 were issued without error or injustice.   
 
In reviewing the circumstances of your separation and characterization of service, the Board considered the totality of the circumstances to determine whether relief is appropriate today in the interests of justice in accordance with guidance provided by the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (Wilkie Memo of 25 July 2018).  Accordingly, the Board considered and acknowledged your positive contributions to the Marine Corps, the length of your active duty service to our nation, and your post-discharge achievements.  Even considering these potentially mitigating factors in accordance with the above referenced guidance, the Board did not find that relief was in the interest of justice.  The Board concluded that your discharge characterization was issued without error or injustice, and that corrective action is not warranted. 
 
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,