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

Docket No: 10111-18                                   
Ref: Signature Date 

This letter is in reference to your application of 17 August 2017 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 that 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 23 October 2019.  The names and votes of the members of the panel 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 this Board.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 26 July 1984.  The record reflects that on 27 November 1984, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence from 19 November 1984 to 24 November 1984.  According to your certificate of release or discharge from active duty (DD Form 214), you submitted a request for an undesirable (now called other than honorable (OTH)) discharge for the good of the service in lieu of action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and you were absent from your unit from 30 November 1984 to 17 June 1985.  While the records concerning your separation are not complete, prior to submitting such a request, you would have conferred with a qualified military lawyer at which time you would have been advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. Your request was granted and, on 31 July 1985, your commanding officer was directed to issue you an OTH discharge by reason of good of the service.  On 2 August 1985, you were so discharged. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your desire to upgrade your discharge.  The Board considered your contention that you have no criminal record and have held a job from 1985 to 2018.  The Board also considered the character letters submitted on your behalf.  The Board commends you on your post-service conduct and accomplishments, however, concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in a NJP and your request for discharge.  The Board relied on a presumption of regularity to support the official actions of public officers and, in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary, presumed that they have properly discharged their official duties.  Furthermore, the Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge was approved since, as a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor. Accordingly, the Board, in its review, discerned no material error or injustice in your discharge. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken.  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, 

11/7/2019