DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 5368-16 
JUN 1 9 2017 

Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 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 oflimitations and consider your application on its merits. A threemember 
panel of the Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 26 April 2017. 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 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. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 20Januai:y 1960. You served for a 
year and three months without disciplinary incident, but during the period from 27 April 1961 to 
10 August 1962, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on one occasion, were convicted by 
summary court-martial (SCM), and a special court-martial (SPCM). Your offenses were 
unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for periods totaling 55days. On 24 April 1963, you 
were once again convicted by SPCM; your offence was UA from your unit for 72 days. The 
sentence imposed was confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture ofpay, a reduction in paygrade, and 
a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 23 June 1963, the Chief ofNaval Personnel evaluated your 
case and suspended the BCD; he placed you on suspension for one year and directed that you 
would be separated from the Navy with an undesirable discharge by reason ofunfitness ifthe 
suspension were violated. The very next month on 9 August 1963, you were once again UA 
from your unit until you were apprehended by military authorities on 15 October 1963, a period 
of 63 days. Your commanding officer vacated the suspension and on 7 November 1963, you 
were discharged with an other than honorable characterization of service. 

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. The 
Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors, such as you post service conduct, and your contention that your misconduct 
was influenced by your family, having a new wife, your sick mother, and being young and 
overwhelmed. The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your 
case because ofthe seriousness ofyour repeated misconduct that resulted in, an NJP, an SCM, 
two SPCMs, and periods ofUA totaling over six months. Further, the Board noted that you were 
given an opportunity to earn a better characterization ofservice· when the BCD you received was 
suspended, but failed to do so as evidenced by your continued'misconduct. In regard to your 
contentions, although the Board was sympathetic to your concerns for your family, the Board 
concluded that your record clearly reflected your willful misconduct and demonstrated you were 
unfit for further service. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at 
this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission ofnew 
and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. 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