DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
 
DocketNo: 1727-17 

AUG 22 2018 

Dear 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 10 of the United States Code, section 1552. 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. Consequently, your application 
has been denied. 

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 ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 16 May 2018. The names and votes of the 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 of your application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, and 
applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 


You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 18 November 1969. 
You served for about four months without disciplinary incident, but during the period from 
12 March 1970 to 17 April 1970, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions. 
Your offenses were unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for periods totaling 34 days and 
failure to obey a lawful order. On 11 September 1970, you were convicted by special courtmartial 
(SPCM) of UA from your unit for a period of 111 days. The sentence imposed was 
confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay, reduction in paygrade and a bad conduct discharge 
(BCD). On 9 February 1971, you received a BCD after appellate review was complete. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, including your contention that 
you did not have adequate representation. The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient 
to warrant relief in your case because ofthe seriousness ofyour repeated misconduct that 
resulted in two NJPs, an SPCM and periods of UA totaling over four months. In regard to your 
contention, the Board viewed your allegation with serious concern. However, this Board is not 
an investigating agency nor does it have the resources to investigate allegations regarding 
individuals and occurrences that happened more than ( 40) years ago. The Board is also 
prohibited by law from reviewing the findings ofa court-martial, since there is an appeal process 
for court-martial. The Board in its review discerned no iinpropriety or inequity in the discharge. 

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 of 
new 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 of an official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director