Docket No: 6973-20
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 14 April 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, 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 service on 20 March 1968.  You were convicted at summary court martial on 18 April 1968 and again on 8 May 1968 for a total of three specifications of unauthorized absence (UA).  On 21 September 1968, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order, and failure to go to your appointed place of duty.  On 28 January 1969, you received a special court martial (SPCM) conviction for leaving your post before being properly relieved.  You began a period of UA from 10 December 1970 until your surrender on 8 June 1971.  As a result of the foregoing, you submitted a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court martial.  On 30 July 1971, your request was denied.  Subsequently, on 30 August 1971, you were convicted at a SPCM for UA.  On 8 January 1972 you began another period of UA until your apprehension on 5 June 1972.  As a result of the foregoing, you again submitted a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court martial.  On 5 July 1972, your request was denied.  Subsequently, on 20 July 1972, you were convicted at a SPCM for UA.  You were sentenced to confinement, forfeiture of pay, reduction in rank, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).  On 24 January 1974, you were discharged with a BCD, as a result of a court martial conviction.    
 
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 and contention that due to the abuse you received from your drill instructors and the influence of your spouse, you went into a UA status.  You contend that you received high marks and promotion, and if it were not for the hardship you endured, you would have completed your enlistment.  Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  Specifically, the Board noted your repeated misconduct which resulted in an NJP, two SCMs, and three SPCMs, outweighed these mitigating factors.  Accordingly, 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,