Docket No: 4039-21 
                     
 
 
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 July 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 9 June 1978.  On 26 July 1979, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) which lasted twelve-days.  On 14 August 1979, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a period of UA.  On 3 September 1979, you began a second period of UA which lasted three-days.  On 22 October 1979, you received a second NJP for a period of UA, and disobeying a lawful order.  On the same date, you were counseled for frequent involvement with military authorities and advised that failure to take corrective action could result in administrative separation.  On 19 December 1979, you failed to report to your appointed place of duty.  On 2 March 1980, you began a third period of UA, which lasted ten-days.  On 6 April 1980, you received a third NJP for being absent from your appointed place of duty, disobeying a lawful order, disrespect towards a noncommissioned officer, and one period of UA.  On 7 May 1980, you received a fourth NJP for disobeying a lawful order.  On 5 June 1980 and 16 July 1980, you were counseled for refusing to obey orders, and frequent involvement with military authorities.  You were advised that failure to take corrective action may result in administrative separation.  On 17 July 1980, you received a fifth NJP for disobeying a lawful order to get a haircut, and two instances of willfully disobeying a lawful order.  On 26 August 1980, you were notified of the initiation of administrative separation proceedings by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement.  On the same date, your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable (OTH) discharge characterization of service by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement.  On 27 August 1980, you elected to waive all your procedural rights.  On 5 September, 1980, your separation proceedings were determined to be sufficient in law and fact.  On 19 September 1980, you were discharged 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 contention that you have overcome past issues and have become an outstanding citizen in your community and your family as a great father and husband.  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 NJPs, outweighed these mitigating factors.  The Board noted you did not submit any documentation or advocacy letters to be considered.  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, 
  									      8/10/2021
									      Executive Director