Dear 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 case on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 September 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 and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in March 1970. In May 1970, you sought medical treatment for diminishing visual acuity. On 18 December 1970, prior to your participation in three operations off the coast of Vietnam, non-judicial punishment was imposed on you for an orders violation and disrespect. You were diagnosed with a preexisting left eye condition on 19 March 1971 and a medical board recommended your administrative separation on 24 April 1971. However, based on your rebuttal to the medical board, the Marine Corps determined you could finish out your enlistment. In the meantime, you were convicted by a summary court-martial for disrespect and orders violation on 29 September 1971. Non-judicial punishment was again imposed on your for disrespect on 11 November 1971. After a period of good behavior, you began to leave your unit without authorization on multiple occasions. Non-judicial punishment was imposed for unauthorized absences on 11 October 1972 and 20 November 1972. From that point forward, you were mostly in an unauthorized absence or deserter status until you deserted for the last time on 23 December 1974 after escaping custody. The Marine Corps attempted to notify you of administrative separation processing on 26 August 1983 while you were in a deserter status but the notification was returned as undeliverable. As a result, you were discharged in abstentia on 1 February 1984 for misconduct with an Other than Honorable characterization of service. Post-discharge, you have been treated for anxiety, depression, chronic pain and opioid dependence. The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a change to your narrative reason for separation. You assert that you suffered an eye injury along with back and feet disability conditions while on active duty. Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. First, the Board concluded you were appropriately discharged for misconduct after deserting form the Marine Corps on 31 December 1974 and never returning to duty. In the Board’s opinion, you were mentally responsible for your desertion and the preponderance of the evidence supports the narrative reason for separation and characterization of service you were issued. Second, the Board determined you were ineligible for disability benefits based on your misconduct and misconduct related administrative separation. Disability regulations specify that misconduct processing supersede disability processing. So even if you were unfit for continued naval service due to a disability condition, the Board concluded you were properly discharged for your extensive misconduct. Third, the Board also concluded that your post-discharge disability conditions are insufficient evidence of an injustice to merit a change to your narrative reason for separation or characterization of service. Even applying liberal consideration to your case due to your current mental health symptoms, the Board felt the seriousness of your misconduct substantially outweighed the mitigation offered by your mental health condition. You were punished with non-judicial punishment on four occasions and convicted by a summary court-martial between March 1970 and November 1972. At that point, you commenced to leave your unit without authorization on multiple occasions for extended periods of unauthorized absence until you finally deserted from the Marine Corps in Dec 1974. The Board determined you were fortunate not to be convicted by a court-martial and awarded a punitive discharge for your actions. In their opinion, your misconduct was too serious to be offset with the mitigation evidence offered by your mental health condition and other post-discharge disability conditions. Accordingly, the Board found insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. 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 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.