DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 99-17/ 
12873-11 

APR 24 2017 


Dear : 

This is in reference to your latest reconsideration request dated 18 November 2016. Your 
daughter previously petitioned the Board and she was advised in our letter dated 17 May 2012 
that her application requesting your upgraded characterization ofservice was disapproved. Your 
case was reconsidered in accordance with Board for Correction ofNaval Records procedures that 
conform to Lipsman v. Secretary ofthe Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). 

Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board for 
Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 24 March 2017. The names and 
votes ofthe members ofthe panel will be furnished upon request. Documentary material 
considered by the Board consisted ofyour application and any material submitted in support of 
your application. 

You presented as evidence your explanation ofthe circumstances leading up to your courtmartial 
conviction and that you thought your service obligation was complete when you were 
released from active duty. The Board found that you reenlisted in the Marine Corps Reserves 
effective 2 February 1950 for a period offour years. During your reserve obligation, you were 
activated on 3 August 1950. While on active duty, you went in an unauthorized absence (UA) 
status from 18 thru 27 September 1950. You were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) 
on 4July1951 for being UA. On 2 July 1951, you were provided orders detaching you from 
active duty and were released from active duty on 4 July 1951. Your orders also directed you to 
report by letter, with a copy ofthe orders received, to the Director, 
to complete your reserve commitment. You acknowledged these orders by signing the 
orders as received on 2 July 1951. On 2 February 1953, you were assigned to the Inactive Status 
List (ISL) for lack ofsatisfactory participation in the Reserves, and you remained on the ISL 
until you received a General (under honorable conditions) discharge on 1 February 1954, at the 
completion ofyour obligated service. The Board determined that your lack of satisfactory 
participation from 2 February 1952 thru 1 February 1954 during your reserve commitment 
outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge. Accordingly, your application has been 
denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour reconsideration petition are such that favorable 
action cannot be taken again. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the 
submission ofnew and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered 
by the Board. In the absence ofsufficient new and material evidence for reconsideration, the 
decision ofthe Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the 
Board, from a court ofappropriate jurisdiction. 

It is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity 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. Commitment 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director