DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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


Docket No: 1196-16 
FEB 01 2017 

Dear 

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 10 ofthe 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 oflimitations and consider your application on its merits. A three
member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on I November 2016. The names and votes ofthe members of the 
panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror and iajustice were reviewed in 
accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings ofthis 
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, 
regulations, and policies. 

After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe 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 and begin a period ofactive duty on I November1976. During 
the period from 25 July to 9 September 1977, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP), for 
unauthorized absence (UA) for six days and failure to be at your appointed place ofduty. You 
were also in an UA status for a period totaling 39 days. On 24 May 1978, you were convicted by 
civil authorities offelonious breaking & entering and felonious larceny. Subsequently, you were 
notified ofpending administrative separation action by reason ofmisconduct due to frequent 
involvement with military and civil authorities. After you waived your procedural rights, your 
commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable (OTH) conditions by 
reason ofmisconduct due to frequent involvement with military and civil authorities. The 
discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under OTH 
conditions by reason ofmisconduct. On 14February1979, you were so discharged. 

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors, such as charter letters, your desire to upgrade your discharge and assertions 
that you served honorably while you were enlisted and it has been 37 years since your discharge. 

The Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief given your 
misconduct. In this regard, the Board concluded that the seriousness of your misconduct, 
coupled with a civil conviction, outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge and clearly 
supports the commanding officer's decision to issue you an OTH discharge. In regard to your 
assertion that it has been 37 years since your discharge, the Board noted that there is no provision 
in law or regulations that allows for re-characterization ofa discharge automatically due solely to 
the passage oftime. The Board concluded that your misconduct was too serious to warrant 
upgrading your discharge. 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 ofnew and material 
evidence wjthin one year from the date of the Board's decision. Net 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 ofregularity attaches to all official records. 
Consequently, when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the burden is on the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director