DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 1589-16 JAN 27 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 threemember panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 2016. The names and votes ofthe.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 ofyour application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval 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. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, Board regulations state that personal appearances before the Board are not granted as a right, but only when the Board determines that such an appearance will serve some useful purpose. In your case, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence ofrecord. You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period ofactive duty on 1 February 1980. You served for six months without disciplinary incident, but during the period from 5 August 1980 to 16 April 1981, you received nonjudicial punishment (NIP) on six occasions. Your offenses were unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for periods totaling 63 days, using disrespectful language toward a noncommissioned officer, and failure to go to your appointed place ofduty. Although the Board lacked your entire service record book (SRB) it appears from the SRB entries before the Board that you were subsequently involuntarily processed for separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement. In connection with this processing, you would have acknowledged the separation action and the separation authority would have approved a recommendation for separation. The record clearly shows that on 2July1981, you were discharged with an Other Than Honorable (OTH) separation due to misconduct. The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your contention that after your girlfriend and family were killed in a car accident you didn't care anymore and went crazy. The Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because ofthe seriousness ofyour repetitive misconduct that resulted in six NJPs. Accordingly, your application has been denied. Regarding your concern about eligibility for healthcare whether or not you are eligible for benefits is a matter under the cognizance ofthe Department ofVeterans Affairs (DVA), and you should contact the nearest office ofDVA concerning your right to apply for benefits. 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 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~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 of probable material error or injustice. Sincerely, Executive Director