DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
 
Docket No: 7023-17 
MAR 07 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 5 November 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 submjtted in support thereof, relevant portions ofyour naval record, and 
applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps and began a period of active service on 13 February 1964. 
On 15 September 1965, you were convicted at a special court-martial (SPCM) for a period of 
unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 29 days and failure to obey a lawful order. On 26 January 
1966, you received NJP for a period of UA totaling 2 days. You began another period of UA on 
5 June 1966, that ended with your surrender on 8 August 1966, a period of 64 days. On 14 
October 1966, you were convicted at a SPCM for the aforementioned period of UA and missing 
movement. On 1 December 1966, you began another period of UA that terminated with your 
apprehension on 3 March 1967, a period of 92 days.  On 27 April 1967, you were convicted at SPCM 
for the aforementioned period of UA. On 9 November 1967, you were notified of administrative 
discharge processing by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable 
nature with military authorities. You did not consult with counsel and waived your procedural 
rights. Your commanding officer recommended an under other than honorable (OTH) 
characterization of service. On 16 November 1967, the discharge authority directed an OTH 
discharge and on 29 November 1967, you were discharged. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade 
your discharge, post service educational accomplishments, and contention that you were too 
immature to understand the consequences of your actions. While the Board commends you on 
your post-serve education, it concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant an 
upgrading to your discharge based on the seriousness of your misconduct, as evidenced by your 
repeated periods of UA, which resulted in one NJP, and three SPCMs. The Board in its review 
discerned no impropriety or inequity in your discharge. 

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 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 of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 



Executive Director