DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 9185-18 Ref: Signature date Dear This letter 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 that 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 1 October 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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You reenlisted in the Navy on 23 May 1967. On 4 June 1968, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for disrespectful language and deportment toward a superior petty officer. On 19 May 1971, in accordance with your plea of guilty, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 36 days. On 23 July 1971, you submitted a written request for discharge for the good of the service (GOS) to avoid trial by SPCM for UA totaling 31 days. Prior to submitting this 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 GOS request was granted and your commanding officer was directed to discharge you with an other than honorable characterization of service for the good of the service. On 12 August 1971, pursuant to your request, you were so discharged. As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction, as well as the potential penalties of such a punitive discharge. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in your case, including your letter from Inc., your resume, certificate of training, your desire to upgrade your discharge, and your contentions that you became addicted to alcohol while in the Navy, that you received help with your alcohol addiction, retired as a maintenance supervisor, and have been married for 43 years. However, the Board found that these factors were insufficient to warrant relief in your case given your misconduct and request for a GOS discharge in lieu of a trial by SPCM. Regarding your contention that you became addicted to alcohol while in the Navy, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention that you suffered from alcohol addiction while in the Navy. Regarding your contention that you received help with your alcohol addiction, retired as a maintenance supervisor, and have been married for 43 years, the Board noted that, while commendable, your post-service conduct does not excuse your conduct while enlisted in the Navy or the basis for your discharge. 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 the 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.