Docket No: 6692-20
Ref: Signature date             
              
Dear 
 
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 21 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 on 24 September 1976.  According to your naval record, on 25 April 1977, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for possessing 17.9 grams of marijuana.  Next, on 7 October 1977, you received NJP for unauthorized absence (UA).  On 28 February 1978, you were apprehended by the , police for “serious charges” pending in .  You then were convicted by a Summary Court-Martial (SCM) on 9 May 1978, for UA.  During the next seven months, you received NJP four more times, until you were notified that you were being processed for administrative separation on 16 February 1979.  You waived all of your rights, except for the right to receive copies of documents sent to the discharge authority.  On 17 April 1979, you were discharged with an an other than honorable characterization of service.  Subsequently, you petitioned the Navy Discharge Review Board in 1981 and again in 1988, and each time your petition was denied.  You contended that you were young and that your alcohol abuse was a mitigating factor in your discharge, as well as the passage of time from your date of discharge.  You petitioned this Board in 2004, in which you contended that you were offered an early honorable discharge by your commanding officer. 

The Board carefully reviewed the materials that you provided and carefully considered your contentions.  Despite the fact that you previously petitioned this Board in 2004, this Board reviewed your petition anew.  You contend in your petition that you believe your discharge was unjust because it was not as a result of a civilian conviction or a court-martial, and you did not have an opportunity for an administrative discharge board.  You also reiterated your previous assertion that you were offered an early out hardship discharge by your commanding officer.  The Board found that there were basis for the initiation of administrative discharge proceedings, which was based on your frequent involvement with military authorities.  Further, the Board found that you were advised of your right to an administrative discharge board, but you waived that right.  The Board further found that you did not provide any evidence, and there is none in your records, to support your assertion that you should have received a promised honorable discharge in return for you leaving the Marine Corps early, as you have contended. 
 
The Board also 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 and contentions described above.  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 six NJPs and SCM conviction, outweighed these mitigating factors.  The Board noted you did not present evidence, such as, for example, commendatory material or other post-service information, which the Board could have evaluated for sufficiency in supporting a discharge upgrade.  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,