DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

Docket No: 4703-20    
Ref:  Signature Date 


This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted 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 14 December 2020.  The names and votes of the panel members 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 the 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 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). 

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 29 May 1981.  During the period from 4 November 1981 to 3 March 1982, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) three times.  The punishments included two instances of failing to go to your appointed place of duty, being drunk while in a duty status, and two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 28 days.  On 4 March 1982, you were counseled concerning your frequent involvement with military authorities, and your continued failure to conform to military standards.  You were warned that further infractions could result in administrative discharge action.  On 1 May 1982, you began a period of UA that lasted 36 days, ending on 7 June 1982.  On 13 July 1982, you submitted a request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in lieu of court-martial for the 36 days of UA, and failure to obey an order to remain in your barracks room.  Prior to submitting your request for discharge, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were advised of your rights, and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.  Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted, and on 11 August 1982, and you received an OTH discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.       
              
The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case in accordance with the Wilkie Memo.  These included, but were not limited to, your desire to upgrade your discharge, your assertions regarding the circumstances that led to your UA, and your assertion that you have maintained employment since your discharge.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board determined that your repeated misconduct, as evidenced by your three NJPs and your UA which resulted in your request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial, outweighed these mitigating factors.  Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief.  

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, 
1/25/2021 

Executive Director