DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 2088-21 
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 23 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, 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 15 November 1994. On 19 June 1995, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) which lasted 11 days. On 29 and 30 July 1995, you were late for restriction muster. On 31 July 1995, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for the 11-day UA, and for being late for restriction muster. On 7 August 1995, you were counseled for deficiencies of failure to adhere to military regulations as evidenced by your NJP. You were advised that failure to take corrective action may result in administrative separation. On 8 August 1995, you were accused of stealing a vehicle from a fellow marine. On 10 August 1995, you began a period of UA which lasted 61 days and resulted in your apprehension by civilian authorities on 9 October 1995. You subsequently requested Separation in Lieu of Trial (SILT) by Court-Martial, with an Other Than Honorable characterization of service. 
 
On 17 November 1995, your discharge administrative proceedings were determined sufficient in law and fact. On 20 November 1995, your commanding general (CG) forwarded the SILT request to the Commandant of the Marine Corps. However, on 3 December 1995, you were accused of stealing a second vehicle from a fellow marine. On 4 December 1995, you began a another period of UA which lasted 24 days and resulted in your apprehension by civil authorities. On 27 December 1995, you were placed in pretrial confinement. On 17 April 1996, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) for larceny and wrongful appropriation by stealing vehicles, and UA. You were sentenced to confinement, a fine, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 13 May 1996, the CG approved your request for appellate leave. On 19 February 1998, the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals issued an appellate decision affirming that the findings and sentence in your case were correct in law and fact. On 23 July 1998, your SPCM supplemental order was issued affirming your BCD, and you were so 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 went UA due to being a victim of racial and other prejudice; and your assertion that you did not steal the cars. 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 NJP and SPCM, 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, 
5/6/2021 

2