Docket No: 5048-20            
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 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 23 November 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). 
 
The Board determined that your 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 your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 3 December 1989.  On 10 September 1991, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for knowingly altering a military identification card, and consuming alcohol under the legal drinking age.  On 2 June 1992, a summary court-martial (SCM) found you guilty of conspiring with a private first class to commit an unauthorized absence (UA) to avoid field exercises, willfully abandoning your fighting position, and willfully suffering damage to military property of a value of $2,087.  On 29 October 1992, you received NJP for willfully absenting yourself from your unit.  On 16 November 1992, you were counseled concerning financial support for dependents.  On 30 November 1992, Commanding Officer (CO),  Marines notified you of Administrative Separation proceedings by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions.  In December 1992, you waived your right to appear before an administrative separation board (ADB).  Your CO then forwarded your case to the separation authority recommending your discharge with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  A Staff Judge Advocate reviewed your administrative separation package and found it sufficient in law and fact.  On 3 February 1993, you were discharged on the basis of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions, and received an OTH characterization of service, and a reentry (RE) code of RE-4.   
 
In your application to the Board, you ask for an upgrade to your OTH discharge, and change to your RE-4 code to an RE-1, and a change to your narrative reason for separation.  You state that the discharge was unfair at the time, the discharge is unfair now, and the discharge was procedurally defective.  
 
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 and procedurally defective.  The Board found that you did not provide sufficient evidence or information to support your contention and overcome the misconduct reflected in your record.  The Board noted that the record shows that you were given an opportunity to defend yourself, but waived your procedural right to present your case to an ADB, and thereby forfeited your best opportunity to receive a better characterization of service.  The Board also noted that your administrative discharge was reviewed by a staff judge advocate and found sufficient in law and fact.  The Board concluded that your OTH discharge, RE-4 and narrative reason for separation were properly assigned following your administrative separation proceedings on the basis of misconduct and minor disciplinary infractions. 
 
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.  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 two NJPs and SCM conviction, 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,