Docket No: 5234-20 
Ref: Signature date 
 
 
Dear  
 
This letter 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 with respect to your request to upgrade your characterization of service was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.     
 
Although you did not file the application in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider the application on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered the application on 16 September 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 the application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a 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 the case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 27 November 1981.  On 5 October 1983 and again on 24 January 1984, you received written counseling that you were not recommended for promotion due to lack of leadership abilities.  On 27 January 1984, you received nonjudicial punishment for a three day period of unauthorized absence.  On 9 March 1984, you received a written counseling that you were engaging in behavior that was not befitting a Marine.  On 9 Apr 1984, you received a written counseling that you were absent without authority.  In September 1984, you commenced a period of unauthorized absence, and you remained absent until you were apprehended in Maine after approximately three years.  After you were returned to military jurisdiction and you were facing a court-martial, you requested that you be administratively discharged in lieu of the trial by court-martial.  Your request was accepted and you were discharged on 29 October 1987, with an other than honorable characterization of service. 
 
The Board carefully reviewed the materials that you provided and carefully considered your contentions, including that while you were on leave you injured your upper thigh and you were assigned to bedrest.  You also noted that you called the officer in charge at your barracks who instructed you to return on time regardless of the doctor's instructions and physical limitations. and, you were warned that you would be considered absent without authority and face prison; You stated that, because of the fear of facing prison time, young age, immaturity, and naiveté, you did not to get help or legal counsel.  
 
After careful consideration, the Board noted that, in light of a three-year unauthorized absence for which you returned only by apprehension, you received significant clemency when you were afforded the opportunity to be separated from the Marine Corps administratively, which spared you the stigma of a court-martial conviction and potential prison time.  Accordingly, the Board did not find evidence of injustice in your assigned characterization of service, nor did it find evidence to support clemency. 
  
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken.  He is 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,