Docket No: 6965-19 
Ref: Signature Date 
  
 
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 application on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve on 8 December 1994.  You served on active duty from 10 February 1997 to 17 July 1997, for a period of training.  On 28 April 1998, you arrived to your reserve unit.  However, after reporting, you accumulated 53 unauthorized absences from missing scheduled drills.  On 3 October 1999, 4 January 2000, and 12 January 2000, your commanding officer (CO) notified you, each time by certified mail, regarding your unsatisfactory participation in the Selected Marine Corps Reserve, and further advised you of administrative action if unsatisfactory participation continued.  On 18 February 2000, your CO notified you by certified mail of his intentions to discharge you on the basis of unsatisfactory participation.  You failed to respond to your CO’s letter which resulted in a waiver of your procedural rights.  On 5 March 2000, you were again notified by certified mail of your unsatisfactory participation.  On 15 March 2000, your CO notified you of his intent to administratively reduce you to Private First Class due to unsatisfactory performance, and on 14 April 2000, you were further notified that you had been reduced.  On 7 May 2000, you were again notified by certified mail regarding your unsatisfactory participation and the consequences for continued unsatisfactory participation.  On 27 June 2000, your CO recommended discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of failure to participate.  On 16 January 2001, the discharge authority approved your CO’s recommendation and directed separation under OTH conditions by reason of failure to participate.  On 23 January 2001, you were discharged from the Marine Corps Reserve.  
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and contentions that you were injured on a training deployment, you were told to go to the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), and your command never contacted you again.  The Board also noted your contentions that you did not set out to miss drills, you got lost in the shuffle, and it has been 19 years since your discharge.  In this regard, the Board concluded that your failure to participate in scheduled drills outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge. 
 
In regard to your contention that you were injured on a training deployment and was told to go to the DVA, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention.  In regard to your contentions that your command never contacted again and you got lost in the shuffle, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence which is contrary to your contention.  The record clearly shows that your command mailed out several notification letters by certified mail and you failed to responsd to the letters.  In regard to your contention that it has been over 19 years since your discharge, the Board noted that there is no provision in law or regulations that allows for re-characterization of a discharge automatically, due solely to the passage of time.    
 
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.   
 
Sincerely,