Docket No: 8793-19
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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 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 United States Marine Corps (USMC) on 28 July 1975.  On 29 July 1976, civil authorities apprehended you and charged you with assault with intent to commit great bodily harm less than murder.  On 17 August 1976, the civil charges were dismissed, and pursuant to a request from the Commandant of the USMC, you were released to the custody of the USMC.  On 26 August 1976, you were returned to military control.  On 17 September 1976, a special court-martial convicted you of two specifications of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 126 days.  On 2 January 1977, you commenced another period of UA lasting 29 days.  After your return, on 14 February 1977, you submitted a written request for discharge for the good of the service (GOS) to avoid trial by court-martial.  Prior to submitting your 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.  Your request was granted and your commanding officer was directed to issue you an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service.  On 2 March 1977, you were discharged. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and contention that you went into a UA status due to getting into a bar fight while on leave which resulted in you being sentenced to 90 days in the county jail without legal representation.  The Board also noted your contentions that you were never asked why you were UA, and it has been 42 years since your discharge.  However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case given your misconduct and request for a GOS discharge in lieu of a trial by court-martial, which spared you the stigma of another court-martial conviction.  The Board further noted that there is no provision in law or regulations that allows for re-characterization of a discharge, 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,