Docket No: 2955-21 Ref: Signature Date Dear This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code. After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted 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 26 May 2021. The names and votes of the panel members 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 the 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, to include the 25 July 2018 guidance from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness regarding equity, injustice or clemency determinations (Wilkie Memo). You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 31 March 1980. On 1 July 1980 and 12 August 1980, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP). Your offenses were disobedience of a lawful order and two specifications of unauthorized absence totaling 14 days. On 11 September 1980, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of breaking restriction. On 11 June 1982, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of failing to go to your appointed place of duty, being disrespectful in language to a superior noncommissioned officer, assaulting a Military Police in the performance of his duties and engaging in drunk and disorderly conduct. As punishment, you were awarded confinement, forfeiture of pay, reduction in rank to E-1, and a bad conduct (BCD). On 23 July 1982, the Convening Authority only approved the punishment that provided for confinement, forfeiture of pay and reduction in rank to E-1. Subsequently, on 23 July 1982, you were notified that you were being recommended for administrative discharge from the naval service by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. You were advised of, and waived your procedural rights, including your right to consult with and be represented by military counsel, and your right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Your commanding officer (CO) then forwarded your administrative separation package to the separation authority (SA) recommending administrative discharge from the Marine Corps with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. The SA approved the CO’s recommendation and directed your OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. On 8 September 1982, you were so discharged. On 4 August 1994, the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) upgraded the characterization of your discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors to determine whether the interests of justice warrant relief in your case in accordance with the Wilkie Memo. These included, but were not limited to, your desire to 1) upgrade your discharge, 2) change your narrative reason for separation to read “convenience of the government,” 3) change your rank to “Lance Corporal (LCPL),” and 4) change your paygrade to “E-3.” The Board considered your contention that your request for an upgrade of your character of service should be considered out of compassion because of the contributions you have made to society over the past 40 years. You further contend that you have “never been convicted of any crime of non-judicial punishment that would warrant a demotion.” Additionally, you contend that you were never found guilty of misconduct; and the government just did not want to spend any more time or money with your enlistment, hence, releasing you with an OTH. Based upon this review, the Board concluded these potentially mitigating factors were insufficient to warrant relief. Although, your characterization of service was upgraded by NDRB, the Board determined that your misconduct, as evidenced by two NJPs, and SCM and SPCM conviction, outweighed these mitigating factors. Regarding your contention that you were never found guilty of misconduct, the Board noted that the record contains documented evidence, which is contrary to your contention. Accordingly, given the totality of the circumstances, the Board determined that your request does not merit relief. 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, 6/7/2021 Executive Director