DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No. 1543-16 
DEC 15 2016 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of 10 USC 1552. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of 
justice to waive the statute oflimitations and consider your case on its merits. A three-member 
panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your 
application on29 July 2016. The names and votes of the members ofthe panel will be furnished 
upon request. Your allegations oferror and injustice were reviewed in accordance with 
ac1.ministrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedingsˇof this Board.ˇ 
Documentary material considered by the Board consistedˇ ofyour application, together with all 
material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and 
policies. 

After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found that the 
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or 
injustice. 

You enlisted in the United States Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 
24 August 1999. You served for four months without any disciplinary incident, until 
25 December 1999 when you began a 459-dayperiod ofunauthorized absence (UA), until you 
were apprehended on 28 March 2001. 

On 23 April 2001, you submitted a written request for separation in lieu oftrial by court-martial. 
Prior to submitting this request you conferred with a qualified military lawyer at which time you 
were advised ofyour rights and warned ofthe probable adverse consequences ofaccepting such 
a discharge. Subsequently, your request was granted and the commanding officer directed your 
other than honorable discharge. 

Your application claims that "I was offered a SILK [SIC] Package ifl chose to reenlist that 
would have given me an honorable discharge when I completed my 4 year enlistment. 

Circumstances did not allow me to reenlist but I would never have been offered the SILK [SIC] 
Package was not a value. You have failed to provide any proof that you were miscounseled 
or regarding a reenlistment, or any proof that you were miscounseled regarding the type of 
discharge you were given. 

As a result of your request for separation in lieu oftrial by court-martial, you were spared the 
stigma ofa court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and the 
possibility ofconfinement for six months. On 18 May 2001, you were discharged under other 
than honorable conditions. 

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors. However, the Board determined that these factors were not sufficient enough 
to warrant relief in your case because of the seriousness ofyour misconduct. Furthermore, the 
Board found that you received the benefit ofyour bargain with the Marine Corps when your 
request for discharge was granted and you should not be permitted to change it now. Finally, the 
Board concluded that the lost time ofmore than fifteen months does not constitute service under 
honorable conditions. The Board determined that to recharacterize your service to honorable 
would be unjust and do a disservice to those who have served honorably and completed their 
enlistments without any disciplinary actions. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission ofnew evidence 
within one year from the date ofthe Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not previously 
considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. In this regard, it is important to 
keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, 
when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to 
demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director