DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 542-16 
JAN 03 2017 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of title JO 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 9 September 2016. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 
panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror 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. 

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 Navy and began a period ofactive duty on 20 August 1964. On 
2 April 1965, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order and 
using a false identification card with the intent to deceive. You record shows that you served in 
Vietnam during the period from December 1965 to December 1966. During this period, you 
received NJP on three occasions for assault, being incapacitated for the proper performance of 
your duties, two specifications ofviolation ofa general order, and unauthorized absence (UA). 
On 23 August 1967, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of35 days UA. In 
view ofthe foregoing, administrative separation action was initiated. After you were advised of 
your rights, you elected to waive your procedural rights. On I September 1967, your 
commanding officer recommended an Undesirable discharge by reason ofunfitness and 
forwarded your case. The discharge authority determined that you were to be separated with an 
Undesirable discharge, but directed your commanding officer to advise you that you were being 
placed on probation. In response, you stated that you understood the terms ofprobation and 
further stated that you would not comply or accept the Probated Undesirable discharge. You 
refused to sign acknowledgement ofreceipt ofterms ofprobation as outlined by the Chief of 
Naval Personnel (CNP). Subsequently, the matter was referred to the CNP, who ordered 
termination of your probation and execution ofdischarge. On 5 October 1967, you entered a 
period ofUA that terminated when you were apprehended by civil authorities. On 
18 December 1967, you received an Undesirable discharge by reason ofunfitness. 

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully considered your desire to 
upgrade your discharge. The Board also considered potentially mitigating factors, such as your 
youth, possible effects that your service in Vietnam may have caused, and your post-service 
commitment to good citizenship. The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to 
warrant recharacterization ofyour discharge, given the seriousness ofyour misconduct which 
resulted in four NJPs and a SCM conviction. Further, the Board noted that there is no evidence 
in the record, and you provided none, to substantiate that there was a nexus between your 
misconduct and your service in Vietnam. Unfortunately, your application has been denied. 

With regard to your assertion that you were exposed to Agent Orange, the Board noted that 
Vietnam Veterans who served in Vietnam between 1962 and 1975, regardless oflength oftime, 

are eligible for the Agent Orange Registry health exam. In this regard, you should contact the 
nearest office ofthe Department ofVeterans Affairs (DVA) concerning your right to apply for 
benefits or appeal an earlier unfavorable determination. 

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. 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