DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204·2490 

Docket No: 1066-16 

Dear 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your record pursuant to the provisions of 
title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552. 

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 ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 22 September 2016. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 
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, your record, and applicable statutes, regulations, 
and policies. 

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence 
submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 
You enlisted in the Marine Corps, began a period of active on 29 December 1971, and served 
less than a month without disciplinary incident. On 26 January 1972, you received noajudicial 
punishment (NJP) for failing to obey a lawful order. On 16 October 1973, you received NJP for 
an 8-day unauthorized absence (UA). 

On 30 April 1976, you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid 
trial by court-martial for a 573 day UA. Prior to submitting this request, you conferred with a 
qualified military lawyer at which time you were advised ofyour rights and warned ofthe 
probable adverse consequences ofaccepting such a discharge. Subsequently, your request was 
granted and the commanding officer was directed to issue you an undesirable discharge by 
reason of the good ofthe service. As a result ofthis action, you were spared the stigma of a 
court-martial conviction and the potential penalties ofa punitive discharge and confinement at 
hard labor. On 5 May 1976, you were so discharged. 

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and assertions that you served 
honorably for 31 months prior to your extended UA and did not receive adequate treatment prior 
factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because ofthe seriousness ofyour 
to your discharge from . Nevertheless, the Board concluded these 
misconduct which resulted in your request for discharge. The Board believed that considerable 
clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial 
was approved. The Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the 
Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and you should not be permitted to 
change it now. Additionally, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you 
submitted none, to support your contentions of serving honorably prior to your extended UA. 
Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material 
evidence within one year from the date ofthe Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not 
previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 record, the burden is on the applicant 
to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director