DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 6559-17 JAN 03 2019 Dear This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 25 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 6 February 1974. You served for seven months without disciplinary incident, but during the period from 10 September 1974 to 1 July 1975, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions. Your offenses were unauthorized absences (UAs) totaling two days, larceny, and failure to go to your appointed place of duty. On 19 September 1975, you made a written request for discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for 12 instances of failure to go to your appointed place of duty, UA from your unit for a period of 40 days, failure to obey a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer, and wrongful possession of marijuana. Before submitting this request, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, at which time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. Your request was approved, and your commanding officer directed that you be discharged with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor. On 10 October 1975, you were discharged. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your current health, as well as your contentions that you did not actually possess marijuana, and that your UA resulted from personal and family matters. The Board, however, concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct, which resulted in three NJPs and your request for discharge in lieu of trial. In regard to your contentions, the Board notes that your allegations are unsupported in the record or by submission of documentation, and that, after consulting with counsel, you requested to be discharged to avoid trial by court-martial. The Board was sympathetic to your current health issues but in its review discerned no impropriety or inequity in the discharge. It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable action cannot be taken again. 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 the absence of sufficient new and material evidence for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. Sincerely, Executive Director