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

Docket No: 1161-19 Date: 
Ref Signature 

Dear

This is in reference to your application of 14 December 2018 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 5 February 2020.  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.
 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their 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 service on 29 January 1979.  On 22 October 1980, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go at the prescribed time to your appointed place of duty.  On 12 January 1981, you were counseled regarding your misconduct.  On 26 February 1981, you received NJP for failure to go at the prescribed time to your appointed place of duty.  On 8 May 1981, you were counseled regard your misconduct.  On 11 January 1982, you received a civil conviction for misdemeanor larceny. On 12 January 1982, you received NJP for failure to go at the prescribed time to your appointed place of duty, and disrespectful in language toward a superior non-commissioned officer (NCO).  On 10 March 1982, you were counseled regard your civil conviction, and you were notified of your recommendation for discharge with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service.  

On 5 April 1982, an administrative discharge board convened and recommended your discharge with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service for misconduct-civil conviction.  On 10 June 1982, your administrative separation proceedings were determined to be sufficient in law and fact.  On 11 June 1982, the discharge authority approved and directed your discharge with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct-civil conviction, and you were discharged on 21 June 1982. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your desire to upgrade your discharge and contentions you were young.  You state, since your discharge you have been a good citizen. The Board commends your post-service conduct. The Board considered your youth and immaturity as factor in your behavior, but concluded that the severity of your misconduct outweighed your current desire to upgrade your discharge.  The Board noted that you received a civil conviction during your enlistment.  Members of the armed services are subject to conviction by civil authorities and, if such action is taken, may be discharged.
  
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,