Docket No: 2685-19 
Ref: Signature Date 



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 the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found 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 April 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, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 25 February 1981. During the period from 16 April 1982 to 12 August 1982, you received three non-judicial punishments (NJP) for failure to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty and three periods of unauthorized absence totaling 10 days.  On 17 August 1983, you submitted a written request for separation in lieu of trial (SILT) by court-martial for four specifications of unauthorized absence totaling 117 days.  Prior to submitting this request, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer at which time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.  As part of this discharge request, you admitted your guilt and acknowledged that your characterization of service upon discharge would be other than honorable (OTH).  Your request was granted and your commanding officer was directed to issue you an OTH discharge by reason of SILT.  On 25 August 1983, pursuant to your request, you were so discharged. 


The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, including your desire to upgrade your discharge.  The Board considered your contention that you would not have taken the OTH discharge had you not been promised by the legal aid officer at  that your discharge would be changed in six months to an honorable characterization of service, as long as there was no further trouble.  The Board concluded that these factors were insufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct that resulted in three NJPs and subsequent discharge, at your request, to avoid trial by court-martial.  In regard to your contention, there is no evidence in the record and you presented none to support your contention that you were promised that your character of service would be upgraded in six months.  Additionally, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for an upgrade in the characterization of service solely due to the passage of time.  Under the totality of the circumstances, the Board discerned no probable 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.