Docket No: 5437-20 
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 19 February 2021.  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, 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 11 August 1973.  On 2 February 1974, you failed to report in compliance with your orders to Quartermaster School.  On 3 February 1974, you began a period of unauthorized absence which lasted nine-days.  On 25 February 1974, you began a second period of UA which lasted seventy-nine days.  On 16 August 1974, you began a third period of UA which lasted eighty-six days.  On 10 December 1974, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) for two specifications of UA.  Thereafter, you checked-in to a new unit and exhibited improvement.  On 30 June 1975, you were counseled for exhibiting excellent performance and maintaining proper conduct in the performance of your duties.  On 1 December 1975, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for sleeping while on fire watch.  On 5 February 1976, you received a second NJP for disobeying a lawful order from a superior noncommissioned officer.  On 28 December 1976, a medical officer recommended your discharge by reason of unsuitability-character and behavior disorder.  On 30 June 1977, you were tried by SPCM for violating a lawful general order, and intent to deceive and sign an official record.  The military judge dismissed the first charge and you were found not guilty of the remaining charges.  On 21 July 1977, you began a fourth period of UA, which lasted four-days.  On 28 July 1977, you received a third NJP for UA and decided to submit an appeal. On 4 Oct 1977, your commanding officer (CO) denied your appeal request for the aforementioned charge.  On 29 July 1977, you were counseled for frequent involvement, and notified further deficiencies may result in the initiation of administrative separation proceedings.  On 23 August 1977, you were notified of the initiation of administrative discharge processing (ADB) by reason of misconduct, at which point, you elected counsel and waived your procedural rights.  On 11 October 1977, your CO recommended a discharge with a general characterization of service by reason of misconduct-frequent involvement.  On 26 October 1977, your administrative separation proceedings were determined to be sufficient in law and fact.  On 26 October 1977, the discharge authority approved and directed your discharge.  On 28 November 1977, you were discharged.   
 
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 contention that you were young and unable to make proper decisions.  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 NJPs and SPCM, outweighed these mitigating factors.  The Board noted that you did not submit any documentation or advocacy letters to be considered.  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 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 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,