DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 6145-18 Ref: Signature Date Dear , This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552. Your case was reconsidered in accordance with procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Secretary of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). You were previously denied relief by the Board on 8 December 2003, 10 May 2010, 7 October 2014, and 21 January 2016. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 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. The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve an upgrade to your characterization of service and change to your narrative reason for separation to disability. You assert that you were unfit for continued naval service as a result of pneumonia and hemoptysis that you developed while serving in . Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. First, the Board concluded you were mentally responsible for your misconduct that formed the basis for your administrative separation. While there was evidence you were treated for pneumonia and hemoptysis between 23 May 1970 and 30 May 1970, the medical evidence shows that you were released from care back to duty. You subsequently left your unit without authorization until 23 September 1970. The Board found no evidence to excuse your misconduct and determined you were properly processed for trial by court-martial by the Marine Corps. Second, based on the length of your unauthorized absence and the potential for a punitive discharge from a special court-martial, the Board concluded your Other than Honorable characterization of service was properly issued based on your request to be discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The Board felt you received mitigation when the Marine Corps agreed to administratively separate you instead of prosecuting you at a special court-martial. Therefore, they determined no change to your characterization of service was merited. Third, based on the Board's findings that you were mentally responsible for your misconduct and properly processed for administrative separation based on the misconduct, the Board determined you were ineligible for disability processing. Disability regulations stipulated that misconduct processing superseded disability processing. Further, the Board found no evidence in your record that you were unfit for continued naval service as a result of your pneumonia or hemoptysis conditions. As previously pointed out, you were released back to duty after your release from medical care on 30 May 1970. The Board felt this was strong uncontradicted evidence of fitness for active duty. Accordingly, the Board concluded there is insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant a change to your record. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issue(s) involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable action cannot be taken again. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. In the absence of sufficient new and material evidence for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 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, 4/24/2019 Executive Director