DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 8928-18 Ref: Signature date Dear This letter 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 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 4 December 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, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel would not materially add to its understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 1 May 1979. On 10 April 1981, your summary court-martial (SCM) convictions from 7 June 1980, 7 July 1980, and 21 July 1980 were found to be in error and all charges were dismissed. You went on a period of unauthorized absence (UA) from 23 April 1981 to 21 May 1981. You went on a second period of UA from 5 June 1981 to 16 June 1981. You went on a third period of UA from 19 June 1981 to 28 July 1981. You went on a fourth period of UA from 4 September 1981 to 16 November 1981. As a result of the foregoing 151 days of UA, on 8 December 1981, you submitted a good of the service (GOS) request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial. On 17 December 1981, your GOS request for discharge was determined to be sufficient in law and fact. On 21 December 1981, your GOS request for discharge was approved with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. On 14 January 1982, pursuant to your request, you were so discharged. You petitioned the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) to upgrade your characterization of service and contended before that board, in person, that you went UA because your First Sergeant hit you and you failed to use your chain of command. On 27 July 1983, the NDRB determined that your discharge was proper as issued and that no change was warranted. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge, and your contentions that you were placed in the brig unjustly “and it was removed.” Additionally, you state that you were stationed at during the water crisis. The Board noted that your GOS request for discharge was a result of four specifications of UA that were unrelated to the three SCM convictions that were overturned. The Board concluded that the severity of your misconduct outweighed your current desire to upgrade your discharge. Regarding your assertion about the water at , Public Law 112-154, Honoring America’s Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act of 2012, requires the Veterans Administration to provide health care to Veterans with one or more of 15 specified illnesses or conditions. You may contact the nearest office of the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) concerning your right to apply for benefits or appeal an earlier unfavorable determination. 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.