Docket No: 7294-20 
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 the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was 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 25 January 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). 
 
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 on 22 June 1993.  On 3 January 1997, you reenlisted for four years.  On 6 July 1998, you received nonjudicial punishment for unauthorized absence.  On 5 August 1999, you received nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence that lasted for over 200 days, as well as missing movement by neglect.  You were not retained on active duty, and on 2 August 2001, you were discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. 
 
The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case including in accordance with the Wilkie Memo.  These included, but were not limited to, your desire to upgrade your discharge and your contentions that: (a) after you testified against your Company Commander in a sexual harassment claim of another Marine in your platoon, your career was damaged and you were harassed by your command in numerous ways; (b) while you were on approved leave, it was rescinded while you were 3000 miles away, and you were subsequently charged with UA and demoted; (c) prior to that incident, you had a spotless record with high scores on everything; and (d) since the time of your discharge, you completed college, earned two contractors certifications, obtained an engineering degree, and you own and operate a deep-sea diving construction company in  that hires veterans exclusively. 
 
Based upon its review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief.  The Board noted that there is no evidence in your naval records concerning your participation as a witness in a sexual harassment case, and you did not provide any.  Further, while you indicated your unauthorized absence was caused by your command calling you back off of leave, that does not explain your absence of over 200 days.  The Board further noted that your misconduct, which included an unauthorized absence of over 200 days, typically would result in a lower characterization of service.  The Board commends you on your significant post-service achievements, but ultimately, the Board determined that your misconduct 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 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,