Docket No: 1263-21 
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  24 March 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 on 20 January 1997.  On 16 July 1999, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 26 days.  Your awarded punishment was forfeiture of pay, extra duty for 45 days, and reduction to Private First Class.  Your punishment was suspended for six months.  On 1 October 1999, your suspended punishment was vacated due to continued misconduct.  On 20 October 1999, you received NJP for failure to obey an order or regulation by having a male Marine in your room after hours.  On 21 January 2000, you received NJP for failure to obey a lawful order by refusing to train while on the weight control program.  Your awarded punishment was forfeiture of pay, restriction, and extra duty for 14 days.  Your punishment was again suspended for six months.  On 20 April 2000, your suspended punishment was again vacated due to continued misconduct.  As a result, you were notified of administrative separation processing by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  You elected to consult with legal counsel and requested an administrative discharge board (ADB).  On 24 May 2000, you signed a conditional waiver of your ADB in exchange for a separation with a General (under honorable conditions) characterization of service.  However, on 8 June 2000, you then signed an unconditional waiver, waiving your rights and acknowledging that the least favorable characterization of service you would receive would be under other than honorable (OTH) conditions.  Your package was then forwarded to the separation authority and ultimately, on 23 June 2000, you were separated with an OTH characterization of service.   
 
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 change your characterization of service and contention that you signed an agreement to be discharged with a general under honorable conditions characterization of service.  The Board also noted your contentions that you are perusing a career with the Corps of Engineers, that you have lived an honorable life since discharge, have been trouble free since discharge, and have worked in the hazardous waste and ordnance industry.   
 
The Board noted that the record contains documented evidence contrary to your contention.  Based on the evidence in your record, you signed an unconditional waiver on 8 June 2000, which shows you acknowledged that the least favorable characterization of service you would receive would be under OTH conditions.  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 three NJPs and continued 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 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,  

Executive Director