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

Docket No: 6078-17 
FEB 11 Z019 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of Title 10, of the United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious 
consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to 
establish the existence of probable 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 of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 10 October 2018. The names and votes of the 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 of your application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal 
appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issue(s) 
involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and 
considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 1 April 1977. During the 
period from 3 April 1978 to 18 March 1981, you received non-judicial punishment (NJP) on six 
occasions for five periods of unauthorized absence, disobeying a lawful order, and wrongful 
possession of marijuana. On 26 June 1979, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) 
of an unauthorized absence totaling 72 days. On 4 June 1981, you were notified of pending 
administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a 
discreditable nature with military authorities, at which time you waived your procedural rights, 
to consult with counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). 
Your Commanding Officer (CO) recommended discharge under other than honorable (OTH) 
conditions. A Staff Judge Advocate review found your case to be sufficient in law and fact and 
concurred with the Commanding Officer's recommendation for administrative separation. The 
discharge authority directed an OTH characterization of service and on 24 July 1981 you were 
discharged. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your desire to upgrade 
your discharge and contention that you were discharged due to cuts and peer pressure. 
The Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief given the seriousness 
of your repeated misconduct. The Board noted the record shows you were notified of and 
waived your procedural rights in connection with your administrative separation. In doing so, 
you gave up your first and best opportunity to advocate for retention or a more favorable 
characterization of service. After a thorough review of the facts and circumstances unique to 
your case, the Board discerned no impropriety or inequity in the discharge action that would 
warrant a change in your characterization of service. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your 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 of regularity 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 of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

 
Executive Director