Docket No: 5928-19 
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 2 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 Marine Corps and began a period of active service on 30 October 1972.  On 26 March 1973, you received two separate instances of non-judicial punishment (NJP) for a total of three specifications of sniffing glue, and failure to obey a lawful order.  On 20 May 1973, you were arrested by civil authorities for glue sniffing, possession of marijuana, and drunkenness.  On 2 June 1973, you were apprehended by civil authorities and charged with forcible rape, attempted robbery, house breaking, burglary, and resisting arrest.  On 4 October 1973, you pled nolo contendere to the burglary charge.  On 20 November 1973, you were committed to a State Hospital and you were determined to be a mentally disordered sex offender.  On 14 January 1974, your battalion commander recommended your discharge with an honorable characterization of service by reason of unsuitability.  On 20 January 1974, you were notified of the initiation of administrative separation proceedings by reason of misconduct-civil conviction.   On 30 January 1974, you elected to assert your right to consult with counsel and a hearing before an administrative discharge board (ADB).  On the same day, your commanding officer recommended your discharge with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct-civil conviction.   On 5 June 1974, an administrative discharge board (ADB) convened and recommended your discharge with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct-civil conviction.  On 5 August 1974, the staff judge advocate opined that your administrative separation proceedings were sufficient in law and fact.  On 26 August 1974, the discharge authority approved and directed your discharge with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service by reason of misconduct-civil conviction, and you were discharged on 23 September 1974.   
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge, your contention that your commanding officer recommended an honorable characterization of service and your desire for assistance from the Department of Veterans Affairs.  The Board also noted that you received a civil conviction during your enlistment.  Notably, members of the armed services who are convicted by civil authorities may be discharged. The Board considered your contentions and concluded that your discharge was appropriate based your misconduct.   
 
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,